Think about everything that’s on your cell phone. Take a minute.



If you have a smartphone, it’s a lot more than you think. Text messages, photos, and call records are just the beginning. Maybe your phone is connected to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or even a cloud storage system? What about your internet search history?



ADVERTISEMENT

Our mobile devices can tell you an immense amount about ourselves – our habits, medical conditions, or even information on who those we love. Any outside access to that information can be severely intrusive, and should be explicitly limited.

Inside the borders of the United States, you are protected from such unreasonable searches by the Fourth Amendment. At the border? It’s a very different story.



Right now, if you enter or leave the United States through a border, the data on your cell phone, laptop, or other electronic device, can be subject to a warrantless search – with no requirement for probable cause. Customs and Border Protection Agents can compel you to hand over your device – forcing you to divulge your password, threaten you with delayed travel or detainment, and otherwise copy any and all information you have stored. CBP does not need to explain why, or have reason to conduct the search. This is a practice that should alarm all Americans.



This border search loophole for electronics is even more egregious when you consider that within the borders of the United States, even if you’ve been arrested for a crime, law enforcement must obtain a separate warrant to search your phone. The recent Supreme Court decision in Riley v. California rightly found that due to the sheer amount of personal data contained on our phones, a high bar must be set for them to be accessed. Why then is the border different?



Let’s be clear – no one is arguing that Homeland Security should be stripped of their ability to ensure the safety of Americans. Agents must be able to adequately screen for weapons, explosives, drugs, or other items that someone may be carrying. Using such a blanket authority to completely negate the privacy of American Citizens however is wrong. Law enforcement all over the country work inside the established legal framework for obtaining warrants.

Recent data released from the Department of Homeland Security also show an alarming uptick in these searches – with a recent NBC story showing increase from 8,503 searches in 2015, to 19,033 in fiscal year 2016 (a 223 percent increase). In only the first two months of 2017, there were over 5,000 devices searched. Individuals traveling to certain parts of the world have clearly been subjected to the brunt of this increase, and there is alarming evidence that Americans are being targeted on little evidence other than their appearance or name. In the wake of the contentious election and its divisive rhetoric, the question of whether these statements have encouraged this behavior has to be asked.



Working with my colleagues, Reps. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), Don Beyer (D-Va.), and Blake Farenthold Randolph (Blake) Blake FarentholdThe biggest political upsets of the decade Members spar over sexual harassment training deadline Female Dems see double standard in Klobuchar accusations MORE (D-Texas), the Protecting Data at the Border Act was introduced this month to protect your data, and make clear that rights afforded under the Fourth Amendment remain in effect at the border. As written, this bill would bring border searches of electronic devices into line with warrant based searches commonplace within the borders of the United States. Further, it would prohibit the delay or denial of entry of Americans into the country simply because you do not want to hand over your passwords and login information for social media accounts.



I believe we have reached a point where individual privacy has unnecessarily been violated under the blanket of “security.” The legislation we have put forward will not hamper the efforts of those who seek to keep us safe. To be clear, there remain extremely dangerous threats to our nation, and we must continually evolve to meet these growing concerns. Ensuring the safety of your private information, whether it be personal or for business, is not wholly in conflict with maintaining national security however. To argue otherwise leads down a path that threatens the very principles of due process, and endangers the rights of Americans.

Smith represents Washington's 9th District and is Ranking Member of the House Armed Services Committee.

The views expressed by this author are their own and are not the views of The Hill.