Without issuing a ruling, the justices let stand an appeals court’s decision that U.S. border agents may indeed undertake a search of a traveler’s gadgets content on a whim, just like they could with a suitcase or a vehicle.

I think the reporter here might be making too much of this decision by the Supreme Court.

In this case the court ruled that a border search was OK because reasonable suspicion existed. A stronger statement would be a ruling that border search evidence was inadmissible in a particular case because reasonable suspicion did not exist.

Nevertheless, these court battles have been useful because they indicate a framework in which random searches of electronics are really not permissible. As long as the government doesn't step outside that framework, everything is fine. If these searches are only performed where reasonable suspicion exists, there won't be an example of evidence obtained in a situation where reasonable suspicion did not exist, so there won't be an argument in court where that evidence has to be thrown out.

For me the big question is the factual one - Is CBP doing random electronics searches or not? They do random searches of bags. Administration officials have suggested that they are not doing random searches of electronics, but perhaps I can be forgiven for lacking confidence in the statements of government officials regarding civil liberties issues. As long as they are not and the door to that is firmly shut, our rights are secure.

Of course, it would be preferable if the standard at the border was probable cause rather than reasonable suspicion, but I believe such a change would need to happen at the legislature rather than the court, and the political will to enact such a change does not exist.