A divided Second Circuit held that border agents may conduct searches of international travelers’ cellphones without a judicial warrant, reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, or any individualized justification, in the matter of United States v. Alisigwe, No. 24-960 (2d Cir. Sept. 17, 2026).
Border Searches Allowed
Those planning to enter the United States via New York, Connecticut, or Vermont, regardless of the purpose—whether professional or personal—while carrying a smartphone, tablet, or laptop should pay attention to this ruling.
The litigation concerns Alisigwe, who faced a federal criminal probe in 2018 after British border agents confiscated a fake passport from him.
In 2019, after landing at JFK International Airport, federal officers took Alisigwe aside for questioning, scrolled through his mobile device, and discovered the names, dates of birth, and Social Security numbers belonging to other individuals.
It is worth noting that this was not the only instance where federal agents inspected Alisigwe’s phone, as in 2021 they stopped him again upon arrival at JFK and reviewed his device, uncovering a message that proved damaging.
Read Also: Washington Court Invalidates Natural Gas Initiative
Subsequently facing indictments for bank fraud, money laundering, and identity theft, Alisigwe sought to have the evidence obtained from his phone excluded from his trial.
The district court denied the motion because the presence of reasonable suspicion that Alisigwe was engaged in criminal activity permitted the border agents to examine his phone.
Upon appeal, the Second Circuit agreed that the evidence was admissible, but rejected the argument that officers required separate justification to search a traveler’s phone upon entry.
Court Draws Distinction
In his majority opinion, Judge Steven Menashi pointed out that prior rulings drew a distinction between searches at the border, such as at an airport, which are classified as “routine,” and those that are more intrusive and “nonroutine.”
The panel held that “the search of a traveler’s property at the border, including a cellphone, is a routine search that the government may conduct without suspicion.”
Read Also: DOJ Reforms False Claims Act Enforcement Policies
Essentially likening a smartphone to a digital suitcase, the panel held that border searches of travelers, by contrast, implicate diminished privacy interests and promote the sovereign’s right to determine “who and what may enter the country.” It expressly limited Riley v. California, 573 U.S. 373 (2014), which generally required a warrant to search a suspect’s smartphone incident to an arrest, to that specific context.
Judge Eunice Lee concurred only with the outcome, stating she would have upheld the admission of the phone evidence based on the fact that it stemmed from a nonroutine border search supported by reasonable suspicion.
Judge Lee observed that an “unrestricted and suspicionless search of a cellphone is intrusive enough to warrant greater protection than the majority gives it today, which is none.” She also cited United States v. Carpenter, 585 U.S. 296 (2018), which generally mandates a warrant before officers may access cell site location data to track a phone user’s historical movements, to bolster her argument for heightened safeguards.
Questions Remain Unanswered
Important questions remain. After Alisigwe, may border agents, lacking an independent justification, permissibly download the entire contents of a smartphone or laptop that someone brings into the country?
The Second Circuit’s decision appears to reserve judgment on these questions. Three times, the majority emphasized that the agents had not used sophisticated forensic search methods or extracted the cellphone’s whole contents.
Leave a Reply