MemeStreams | Search of Peter Watts demonstrates why more rules are needed for border searches.

The Obama administration is trying to ease Canadians' concerns that by crossing the U.S. border they risk their right to privacy and the abandonment of their information to Big Brother databases.
"I know there's this myth that the United States is one big database. There absolutely is the myth - and that is not the case," Mary Ellen Callahan, the chief privacy officer for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said in an interview during a recent visit to Ottawa.

Nah, its a bunch of big databases, but its ok, they're all interconnected.

However, Canadians were reminded that U.S. border searches can be intrusive last week when, only hours after Ms. Callahan spoke in Ottawa, Toronto science fiction writer Peter Watts was stopped as he tried to leave the U.S. He later complained he was assaulted and arrested when he tried to ask border officers why they were searching his car.

Apparently it was a rather serious altercation - Watts has been charged with assault.

Mr. Watts got his possessions back Saturday, except for a computer and flash drive, which he will get back later - and Chief Smith insisted that while border officers can look through such equipment for evidence of crimes, they didn't copy the information. "We're not allowed to keep the information off of anybody's personal computer or flash drive," he said. "We can look at it, but we can't maintain it."
Mr. Watts said in an interview yesterday that what happened to him was more akin to police brutality than Big Brother information gathering. "But I have to admit there is this crawly feeling - they now have access to all my financial data, and more importantly, all my e-mails."

According to DHS, the US only performed an in depth search of 40 laptops between October 1, 2008 and May 5, 2009. So, about 80 laptops a year. Out of millions of travelers, this science fiction author's laptop was selected to be one of the 80 that are given an in depth search? Why? Because there is no standard of suspicion required for seizure of laptops at the border, DHS doesn't need to have a reason.

This is a perfect example of why we must change the law to require reasonable suspicion for in depth laptop searches. People don't like being searched. People who are randomly selected at the border for search are occasionally going to be indignant about it. Generally speaking, getting in a argument with a police officer is a stupid thing to do, but people do it. Its human nature. Its also human nature for authority figures to get aggressive with people who question them.

It may be the case that CBP has a reason to be suspicious of Peter Watts. Something he said or did or maybe even the nature of his objection to their investigation of him led CBP to seize his laptop for further inspection.

It may also the case that the CBP agents in question simply don't like Peter Watts. They are angry that he challenged their authority and they are giving him the full court press in hopes of finding something, anything that they can nail him with. Its entirely possible that they are basically on a power trip.

Because US policy does not require CBP to establish reasonable suspicion in order to perform a laptop search it can enable inappropriate and punitive use of searches by agents who simply do not like the people they are targeting. Therefore, when such a search takes place, we are left to wonder - is this a legitimate investigation or are these agents simply abusing their authority? Without some requirement for a standard of suspicion, it is impossible to tell the difference.

(As an aside, I'm amazed that the linked article didn't mention Amy Goodman's recent ordeal with Canadian customs. Its not as if Canada's policies are any better then the US's.)