There are a few stories in the news today about some new rules and their implications:
- From the “You Want My iPod?” Department: Border search policies recently confirmed by DHS clarify that Federal agents may take a traveler’s laptop computer or other electronic device to an off-site location for an unspecified period of time without any suspicion of wrongdoing. Officials may share copies of the laptop’s contents with other agencies and private entities for language translation, data decryption or other reasons. The policies apply to anyone entering the country, including U.S. citizens, and according to the agency, have long been in place but were disclosed last month because of public interest in the matter. The policies cover “any device capable of storing information in digital or analog form,” including hard drives, flash drives, cellphones, iPods, pagers, beepers, and video and audio tapes. They also cover “all papers and other written documentation,” including books, pamphlets and “written materials commonly referred to as ‘pocket trash’ or ‘pocket litter.’ ” Reasonable measures must be taken to protect business information and attorney-client privileged material, the policies say, but there is no specific mention of the handling of personal data such as medical and financial records.
Unfortunately, the report speaks for itself in terms of implications. I don’t know if there has been a court challenge on this against the 4th amendment.
ETA: More information is available from Bruce Schneier
- From the “Don’t Take That Pill — It’s Murder” Department: The Department of Health and Humans Services is planning a rule change to redefine pregnancy and abortion. The existing abortion definition used by the federal government and medical groups is the removal of a fertilized egg that has successfully implanted in the uterine wall, where it would continue to grow. The rule change would broaden the definition of abortion to include the most widely used forms of birth control, which can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. The proposal would cut off federal funds to hospitals and clinics that discriminate against people objecting to abortion (under the new rule) because of “religious beliefs or moral convictions.”
This is a rule change that seems to be coming in under the table. I don’t think it is a good thing.
