People keep misconstruing this.

The border search exemption only applies when someone is actually crossing a border, and it does grant broad authority to search whatever they're carrying with them at the time. The authority to do border enforcement within a 100-mile zone around borders does not grant a broad authority to search. It does grant a narrow authority to do things like traffic checkpoints, but those don't permit searches for anything smaller than a person without additional evidence.

I do think the ruling establishing the authority to run checkpoints other than actual border crossings was wrongly decided and harmful, but it's not what's at issue in this case.

There are a lot of issues that fail the constitutional grep test yet somehow they are deemed (un)constitutional. The constitution was written to protect the people and states from the overly zealous congress. Not to fix the situation in which the congress is so dysfunctional that the judiciary has to replace it.

The structure of the Supreme Court is foolish. It made sense initially, having the people who drafted the constitution adjudicate it. But I think it would be better to drop SCOTUS all together, letting the Federal courts sort out their disagreements via consensus. Or have a review panel setup like the House (elected, population based) who have the ability to override rulings and censure/discipline judges who make poor rulings.

Either way, we need more people involved in the process.

> I was barred from the US for life

Getting banned for life due to wrongthink screenshots is pretty wild. No idea why screenshots would be suspicious.

> I can understand that security don't want to take any chances with people carrying supposed explosive powders on an airport, so the system was doing it's protective job.

I'd understand rejecting your entry on that day but why would they make you persona non grata forever? That seems completely out of proportion.

I'm a little confused. Canadian police barred you from the US for life?

Also sounds like you did not take your lawyer's advice not to talk. Regardless, sorry you went through such a stressful ordeal over a false positive.

You never know if a stance you have now will be frowned upon in 5 or 10 years from now.

I’ve heard you can’t pass customs with a phone without your social network accounts.

Does HN comply with CCPA requests?

"To be sure, nonroutine searches, which are “more invasive searches, like strip searches, require reasonable suspicion.” Id. But we have held that “the label ‘non-routine’ should generally be reserved for intrusive border searches of the person (such as body-cavity searches or strip searches), not belongings.” United States v. Levy, 803 F.3d 120, 123 n.3 (2d Cir. 2015) (emphasis added)."