correction

Both the Washington D.C. office and El Paso office would not answer but the supervisor in Las Cruces said it was simply a license plate reader. The cameras could be for that purpose, but what about the square emitter device? I asked him about backscatter and he said the only backscatter machine they use is in a truck.

Photos taken by someone else of the setup:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrissa...n/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrissa...n/photostream/

Looks like cameras, visual and thermal, and lights. I think there was some other device at the Sierra Blanca checkpoint.

N1120A

Still waiting Firebug.

Surprised? It would be illegal, as such a search would require immediate probable cause (fat chance) or a warrant. Moving vans and cars loaded with moving stuff are very popular on that road. I've done it 3 times with my car loaded with stuff.

Given the Supreme Court's distaste for thermal imaging scans, its a little surprising that they are pushing the envelope here. This kind of behavior clearly runs afoul of Kyllo v. United States. Indeed, it is a greater, not lesser invasion of privacy and obvious warrantless search.

michelle227

It would be illegal to actually search through the contents of the van, but the request itself to open the back to view from the back, while standing on terra firma on their two feet would NOT be illegal...and the refusal of the request WOULD be used as a basis to seek assistance and the warrant for a more in-depth review of the contents...

As to vans being popular...while that might be, there are very few going through there at 2:00AM (you know, a time during which MANY arrests for illegal trafficking have been made).

Do not forget that the request to open a van or even a trunk or hood of a private vehicle is NOT illegal...the operator CAN refuse. Whether enough other factors exist to support PC for the warrant is entirely dependent on circumstances. And it was precisely the lack of even the request that caught me by surprise in that particular instance...almost left me with the impression that a successful smuggler could get much through those checkpoints just by being a non-target demographic and having a blonde blue-eyed child in the front seat as a passenger.

N1120A

The refusal of a search is absolutely NOT a basis to seek a warrant. And while they can ask you anything they want, you are not obligated to open anything.

T-the-B

I think we'll be waiting for quite some time.

I respect firebug and appreciate his thoughtful, well-reasoned posts here. But, FB is in somewhat on the horns of a dilemma with this thread. He cannot explain away the behavior of the agents documented by Mr. Bressi without acknowledging that it represents deliberate, repeated and widespread abuse of authority by the Border Patrol.

The problem is that Mr. Bressi has done a thorough job of documenting Border Patrol persons detaining him for no cause at all other than his refusal to bow to their "authority".

When a border patrol person calls you by name or says "we know who you are" there is no way to pretend that any further detention has anything to do with a need to establish identity. Mr. Bressi has captured multiple encounters where the words from the Border Patrol agents' own mouths demonstrate they are aware of who he is, and therefore they know his citizenship status. Yet they continue to detain him for purely punitive reasons.

Firebug knows full well that any further detention beyond that point where citizenship is established (something done the instant the agent recognizes the person in question) cannot be justified under the law. He also knows that this is not an isolated incident since Mr. Bressi has captured multiple occasions involving different agents. His video also shows many other Border Patrol agents witnessing the proceedings and doing nothing to correct an obvious improper detention. Thus, this behavior cannot be dismissed as the isolated actions of a few rogue agents. Rather, it has been shown to be the standard practice of the agency as a whole.

FB would be understandably loath to publicly acknowledge this state of affairs. The better course would be to go silent.

FliesWay2Much

Running the drug dog is certainly mission creep that hasn't yet been challanged, as far as I know. And, I know that there is legal precedent that they can only establish reasonable suspicion to kick off additional searches or detention if they can establish that the car and occupants had actually crossed the border on that day on that trip and had made a continuous trip. That includes answering the citizenship question. Wow -- talk about martial law...

...and, it's no longer isolated to just the southern border. The same types of abuses have been well-documented along the northern border, on AMTRAK trains and ferries which don't cross the border, and throughout the Olympic Peninsula. They have even been documenting stopping and boarding completely domestic munincipal buses in that area.

polonius

What a completely ridiculous statement...of course a "request" to open the back or a "request" to carry out an extensive search is completely legal, as long as they keep in mind that the driver has an absolute right to refuse such a request, and such refusal most certainly cannot be used as the basis for a search.

michelle227

nowhere did I say that the refusal itself was a basis...go back and re-read what I posted:

I've seen more than enough PC affidavits in my life to know WHAT the steps are and what leads to the call for assistance and the external factors that, in the "professional opinion and experience of the officer", tend to give rise to a magistrate authorizing the warrant.

It is not the refusal itself that gives rise to the warrant, but it certainly sets the chain of events into motion that CAN result in a warrant (especially on desolated stretches of highway at 2AM in an area known for illegal activity).

bajajoes

They have XRAY machines there that are used on TRUCKS and can be used on cars!
The LEAST they could do is allow you to exit the car when it is done,
but noooo there is NO notification and NO xray signs.

Firebug4

I would ask that you refrain from attempting to answer for me. I am currently typing on a cell phone something that I loath to do. I am currently moving my family from the rental house to our recently completed new house. My access to the internet is limited. I will try to way watch this video over the weekend from the library if possible. As for the devices in the roadway, they are license plate readers. The same types are used at ports of entries. They are NOT thermal cameras. The truck mounted x-ray referred to in this thread is most likely a VACIS scanner. It is not used on occupied vehicles unless the vehicle contains concealed people and the driver doesn't let the officer know they are there.

FliesWay2Much

Hope the move goes well. When I was a 1st Lieutenant, one of my contractors was a retired colonel. I remember him telling me (regarding damage to household goods caused by multiple moves in a military career): "Three moves equals one fire."

T-the-B

My apologies. I was not attempting to answer for you but rather explain why I feel an answer may well take quite a long time. Your posts here have struck me as particularly well reasoned and balanced. I have no doubt that you are conscientious in your work. I think that that markedly contrasts with the behavior displayed by the Border Patrol agents in many of Mr. Bressi's videos. While it certainly seems that Mr. Bressi exhibits a snotty attitude and attempts to bait the officers, it also is abundantly evident that they detain him with absolutely no cause other than to force him to comply with their conception of how he should behave. It is also equally clear that they refuse to recognize his (any any citizen's) right to remain silent. I suspect that it will be difficult for you to acknowledge that such behavior by Border Patrol agents is not limited to isolated cases but, as the many videos document, is pretty much the standard practice at the checkpoints in question. I say this because I feel that you would not engage in or countenance such behavior yourself. I hope I have not misjudged you.

I wish you well with the move. Moving is stressful under the best of circumstances and I hope I have not added to that stress.

N1120A

Dog sniffs are allowed during traffic stops, so long as they don't cause an abnormal delay. Its bad law, but it is the law set in Illinois v. Caballes. Now, if they have established your citizenship, keeping you beyond that to bring a dog out doesn't seem to comport with Caballes, but it hasn't been challenged either. What has been challenged, and the Supreme Court ruled against the United States on this one, is if a cop decides to feel up your bag and demands permission to search because he suspects something, even if permission is given under such duress, it will be surpressed. That's Bard v. United States.

Yeah, that is a bigger invasion than a thermal imaging search and that majority won't shift.

CalVol

We decided to rent a car and drive to ELP for Christmas instead of fly in order to avoid the airport hassle.

As we went through the BP checkpoint with the dog sniffing around, it dawned on me that if the previous renter had left some illegal herbs behind, I could be in for a long afternoon.

ANB614

I wonder what prompts the extra questions... My boyfriend and I drove through one of these in 2009 at maybe 1 or 2 AM. There was no dog and all we got was the citizenship question.