Key facts
- Journalist Max Blumenthal's cell phones were seized by border patrol agents at Dulles Airport.
- Agents sought to access the content of the phones, requiring advanced search capabilities.
- A federal judge has ordered the government to provide evidence of what was done with the phones.
- The case raises concerns about potential Fourth Amendment violations and government targeting of journalists.
- The incident is one of several recent cases involving government seizure of electronic devices from travelers.
Reporter Max Blumenthal is pursuing a legal challenge against the US federal government after border patrol agents seized his cell phones at Virginia's Dulles airport. The incident occurred on July 10, following Blumenthal's reporting trip to Iran. Agents flagged him for secondary inspection, questioning him about his travel expenses and contacts before requesting access to his two phones. When Blumenthal declined to provide passwords, the agents confiscated the devices.
The phones were returned a week later, shortly after the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee filed an emergency motion. However, Blumenthal has continued the legal fight, seeking evidence from the government regarding the handling of his devices. On Wednesday, a federal judge, Leonie M Brinkema, ordered the government to provide this evidence within 14 days, stating that the case raises "serious constitutional problems" and concerns about the administration targeting journalists.
Freedom of the Press Foundation's Seth Stern noted that such border searches are part of a pattern of the Trump administration cracking down on media it disagrees with. Judge Brinkema cited a recent ruling suggesting a warrant is required for advanced searches of electronic devices, which she indicated federal agents sought to perform on Blumenthal's phones without producing one. The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee's president, Jenin Younes, suggested the seizure of only phones, not laptops or cameras, indicates an interest in personal communications and sources. The judge also referenced a recent case involving subpoenas issued to New York Times reporters, highlighting the court's concern for journalists' rights.