When a search is removed in time and place from the border, the courts have repeatedly held that this represents a greater intrusion on the person requiring that under the totality of the circumstances, customs officers had reasonable suspicion of criminal activity in order to justify the search.

In my opinion, which I've explained at length in numerous places, is that a detailed forensic analysis of a computer is a non-routine search and requires reasonable suspicion. It doesn't really matter whether the analysis occurred at the border or whether the computer was moved to a different location - however, the fact that the computer had to be moved is a indicator that this is a search which is far more intrusive than a "routine" search. Thus, the decision here is appropriate.

The Volokh Conspiracy - Does the Border Search Doctrine Apply To Searching Computers if the Government Moves the Computer Away from the Border Before Searching It?: