Make up for: Blog post on laws and ethics, due 2/20

• Border Searches:  “In order to protect the government’s ability to monitor contraband and other property that may enter or exit the United States illegally, the Supreme Court has recognized a special exception to the warrant requirement for searches that occur at the border of the United States (or at the border’s functional equivalent). According to the Court, routine searches at the border do not require a warrant, probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion that the search may uncover contraband or evidence. See United States v. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531, 538 (1985). The Supreme Court’s most recent border search case, United States v. Flores-Montano, 541 U.S. 149 (2004), suggests that reasonable suspicion is not required for most non-destructive border searches of property. In Flores Montano, the Court determined that the border search of an automotive fuel tank did not require reasonable suspicion. The Court explained that “the reasons that might support a requirement of some level of suspicion in the case of highly intrusive searches of the person—dignity and privacy interests of the person being searched—simply do not carry over to vehicles.” Id. at 1585. Although there may be a lesser privacy interest in gas tanks than in other property (such as computers), the Court’s analysis in Flores-Montano does not appear to be narrowly confined to gas tanks or vehicles.“  (Searching and Seizing Computers and Obtaining Electronic Evidence in Criminal Investigations, Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section Criminal Division Chapter 1, Section C.6, Page 38)

Source: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal-ccips/legacy/2015/01/14/ssmanual2009.pdf

Cases:

US-Born Muslim Scientist Detained, Forced to Unlock NASA Phone

http://www.thewrap.com/nasa-muslim-scientist-sidd-bikkannavar-travel-ban-muslim-ban/

Electronic Media Searches at Border Crossings Raise Concerns After

Trump takes Power

http://www.voanews.com/a/electronic-media-searches-border-crossings-raise-concerns/3730350.html

- Under what circumstances would it be just to disobey that law, in your opinion? Why? Situate your reasoning in the context of one or more of the thinkers on matters of laws and ethics(Plato, King, Rawls).

In the case listed above, in which a US-born NASA scientist was detained at the border until he authorized the access to an electronic device in his possession (owned by the NASA), it would be justified to disobey this law.  The fact that the scientist is a muslim led to this search: “Seemingly, Bikkannavar’s reentry into the country should not have raised any flags. Not only is he a natural-born US citizen, but he’s also enrolled in Global Entry — a program through CBP that allows individuals who have undergone background checks to have expedited entry into the country. He hasn’t visited the countries listed in the immigration ban and he has worked at JPL — a major center at a US federal agency — for 10 years.” This happened right after the infamous travel ban issued by President Trump (many federal judges have ruled it unconstitutional), which gives more evidence that he was targeted because of his religion.

I agree with the question that philosopher John Rawls formulates: “At what point does the duty to comply with laws enacted by a legislative majority (or with executive acts supported by such a majority) cease to be binding in view of the right to defend one’s liberties and the duty to oppose injustice?” (A THEORY OF JUSTICE). In a case like this in which an individual is being targeted because of his religious beliefs, I find it ethically right to not obey this law as a form of protesting the bias of the authorities. The citizen’s constitutional right which grants him freedom of religious is being threatened and he is entitled to protest this injustice.  In this specific case the call for civil disobedience is beyond justifiable because it is a case that is happening too often to Muslim-Americans according to “The American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation both say they have noticed an uptick in complaints about searches of digital devices by border agents.The increase has become most noticeable in the last month (after President Trump’s inauguration), said Adam Schwartz, a senior staff lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation”. This is information found in the second article posted above which also talks about another case in which another Muslim-American was detained until he had to give very sensitive information to the agent: his accounts with his passwords, etc.  I agree with the analysis of civil disobedience that philosopher John Rawls writes about: “In justifying civil disobedience one does not appeal to principles of personal morality or to religious doctrines, though these may coincide with and support one’s claims. Instead one invokes the commonly shared conception of justice that underlies the political order. It is assumed that in a reasonably just democratic regime there is a public conception of justice by reference to which citizens regulate their political affairs and interpret the constitution” (A THEORY OF JUSTICE). Because as citizens of this nation we have the duty to defend the Constitution, to disobey this law which is being miss-practiced by the authorities is an act of loyalty to our Constitution and it should be seen as an act of bravery and respect to the Supreme Law of this land. To submit American citizens to searches because of their religion is not only unconstitutional but it also destroys the moral principles under which this nation was founded.