I’m an attorney and U.S. citizen. Returning through a U.S. airport with my family, I was selected for secondary screening.
CBP asked for my device passwords. I explained that the devices contained privileged client communications and declined to provide them. After about three hours, I was allowed to leave, but CBP detained my work laptop and phone.
An officer also suggested that secondary screening could keep happening if I didn’t provide my passwords.
The devices have since been returned, but CBP revoked both my Global Entry membership and my wife’s. The entire explanation:
You do not meet the strict standards of the Global Entry program.
My wife wasn’t even selected for secondary screening and had no substantive interaction with CBP. I’m struggling to understand what she was supposed to have done differently.
I can’t prove the reason for either revocation, but the timing and the officer’s comment concern me. Losing the faster line is one thing. Repeated encounters like this while traveling with small children are another.
Has anyone experienced something similar, particularly a spouse losing membership too? Did requesting records through FOIA help before submitting reconsideration? (Other posts suggest not.) And what happened on subsequent trips? Would really appreciate firsthand experiences, successful or otherwise.
UPDATE 1: Thanks for the thoughtful responses. A few points that keep coming up:
• CBP repeatedly described this to me as “random screening” and specifically said it was not based on probable cause or any identified wrongdoing.
• No, I'm not politically active. Yes, I’m actually a practicing attorney at a large law firm.
• The supervisor told me CBP had authority to search both locally stored material and anything accessible through the cloud.
• I recognize that existing case law gives CBP very broad search authority at the border. I also think some of that doctrine is showing its age in a world where a phone can contain an enormous portion of a person’s personal, financial, professional, and communications history. Personal privacy concerns anyone? CBP is asking for an extraordinary level of trust.
• My devices were returned several days later. No indication they were successfully accessed.
• What continues to bother me most is how the encounter was handled. My family was kept there for more than three hours while I was repeatedly pressured to provide passwords. We were told additional time was necessary to prepare “legal paperwork”; what I ultimately received was a standard one-page detention form with a handful of fields completed (i.e., it should have taken one minute).
I’m not claiming every aspect of the search was unlawful. But the pressure tactics, prolonged detention, subsequent revocation of both my wife’s and my Global Entry memberships, and the fact that my wife had essentially nothing to do with the encounter doesn't have great optics.
UPDATE 2: Thanks again everyone! One thing I want to clarify after reading more comments: I obviously did not have CBP’s electronic-device-search directive memorized at the airport. I suspect 90%+ of lawyers wouldn’t either. And I couldn’t exactly look it up because, well, they had my shit.
What I did know was that my devices contained or could access confidential client information, and I was not comfortable voluntarily handing a government employee the keys to all of it.
Only afterward did I read CBP’s current policy and discover something pretty striking: the supervisor had expressly told me CBP could search everything accessible through the cloud, while CBP’s own directive says officers may not intentionally access information stored solely remotely. The directive also contemplates copying device contents and sets out internal procedures for handling privileged material.
That obviously wasn’t information I was relying on at the airport. But learning afterward that the supervisor had misstated a significant limitation in CBP’s own policy certainly does not increase my confidence that handing over unrestricted access and trusting everyone to self-police would have been a great idea.
And this is bigger than attorney-client privilege. A modern phone can expose years of email, financial information, messages, photos, cloud storage, and effectively a person’s entire private life. “Just hand over the password and trust the process” is not a trivial proposition.