Travelers flying into the Fourth Circuit’s jurisdiction now have one more thing to worry about at customs: their phones. A federal appeals court on Monday said Customs and Border Protection officers can manually scroll through phones at U.S. ports of entry without a warrant, and it labeled those quick look-throughs “routine” border searches. More aggressive forensic dig-ins, however, remain fenced in by higher constitutional limits. The ruling, which is a published opinion, immediately shapes how international airport inspections work inside the Fourth Circuit and has privacy and press advocates sounding the alarm about what border agents can see.
What the court said
According to The News & Observer, U.S. Circuit Judge A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. wrote in the court’s opinion that “Border searches do not require a warrant to be reasonable. And if a border search is routine, individualized suspicion is not required either.” The panel concluded that short, manual checks of a phone’s contents fall into that “routine” category. At the same time, the court stressed that more intensive forensic extractions still trigger heightened Fourth Amendment scrutiny and therefore sit in a different legal box.
How the Dulles encounter unfolded
The ruling traces back to a secondary inspection at Washington Dulles International Airport in May 2024, where officers found two cellphones and reviewed what was on them during the inspection, according to a press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. Prosecutors say the devices held hundreds of sexually explicit images and videos of minors. The traveler, Jose Alejandro Belmonte Cardozo, later pleaded guilty and received an 18 year prison sentence.
Federal policy and civil‑liberties concerns
U.S. Customs and Border Protection policy already states that officers may search electronic devices during border inspections, and it draws a line between basic and advanced searches. Under that guidance, advanced or forensic searches require reasonable suspicion along with signoff from a senior manager. Even with those internal rules, civil liberties and press advocates are uneasy. Groups including the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University filed briefs warning that device searches can sweep in everything from confidential journalistic sources to other protected expressive material that would normally enjoy stronger constitutional shelter away from the border.
Where other courts stand
Legal reporting notes that the Fourth Circuit is now in step with several other federal appeals courts that treat brief manual checks of phones as routine border searches, while reserving a tougher standard for forensic extractions. Coverage in Law360 explains that the ruling aligns the Fourth Circuit with those courts but does not spell out how long or how deep a manual search can go before it effectively becomes a seizure or the kind of forensic probe that the Constitution treats differently.
Know your rights before you cross
Privacy advocates are not waiting for a test case at the checkpoint. They recommend that travelers pare down sensitive data on any device they carry, consider using a clean travel phone, and fully power devices off before landing. The ACLU guide walks through practical tradeoffs, including what can happen if you refuse to unlock a device or if you choose to comply. If officers seize a device, the ACLU and other groups advise trying to note officers’ names, requesting any paperwork or receipts, and quickly contacting a lawyer or civil liberties organization. They also caution that legal protections can differ based on a traveler’s immigration status and the exact circumstances of the encounter.
What to watch next
Because the opinion is published, it sets the rules for similar cases in the Fourth Circuit unless the court revisits the matter or the Supreme Court steps in. The appeal is listed as No. 25‑4239 on the Fourth Circuit’s docket. Advocacy and press groups are now weighing whether to push for further challenges or seek higher court review, even as they watch in real time how the ruling shapes what happens at airport terminals and other border checkpoints.
