6 ms·

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riley_v._California

• CanSpice 12y ago
  American case law doesn't really hold for Canada.
  • mikesko 12y ago
    And in any case, at borders there is not the same level of protection as within the country: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception "This doctrine is not actually an exception to the Fourth Amendment, but rather to the Amendment's requirement for a warrant or probable cause. Balanced against the sovereign's interests at the border are the Fourth Amendment rights of entrants. Not only is the expectation of privacy less at the border than in the interior,the Fourth Amendment balance between the interests of the Government and the privacy right of the individual is also struck much more favorably to the Government at the border.This balance at international borders means that routine searches are "reasonable" there, and therefore do not violate the Fourth Amendment's proscription against "unreasonable searches and seizures"
    • waqf 12y ago
      > Not only is the expectation of privacy less at the border than in the interior ... Begging the question, wouldn't you say? The only reason there is less expectation of privacy at the border is because of government policies, like this one, whose constitutionality is open to question.
    • mikesko 12y ago
      > Begging the question, wouldn't you say? Yes I would!
  • mikesko 12y ago
    Also see United States v Ickes http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/U.S._v._Ickes http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/U.S._v._Ickes