Careers

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Experience

Innovation

Interactive Maps

Locations

About

Pages

Meet our team of innovators
Ask us how we do it

Professionals

Insights

Services

Thompson Hine LLP, a full-service business law firm with approximately 400 lawyers in 11 offices, was ranked number 1 in the category “Most innovative North American law firms: New working models” by The Financial Times and was 1 of 7 firms shortlisted for The American Lawyer’s inaugural Legal Services Innovation Award. The firm has been recognized by the National Law Journal as a Legal Technology Trailblazer and featured by Bloomberg for its innovative service delivery models, which drive accuracy and predictability. The firm’s commitment to innovation is embodied in Thompson Hine SmartPaTHTM – a smarter way to work – predictable, efficient and aligned with client goals. For more information, please visit ThompsonHine.com and ThompsonHine.com/SmartPaTH.

Home | Thompson Hine LLP

Atlanta

Chicago

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Columbus

Dayton

Los Angeles

Minneapolis

New York

Silicon Valley

Washington, D.C.

<img style="max-width: 100%;height: auto;max-width: 100%;height: auto" loading="lazy" class="alignright size-medium wp-image-3530" src="https://www.thelawforlawyerstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/754/2017/09/U.S.-border-crossing-2-300x200.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="200">The ACLU and the <a href="https://www.eff.org/">Electronic Frontier Foundation</a> have <a href="https://www.eff.org/document/alasaad-v-duke-complaint">sued</a> the Department of Homeland Security&nbsp;to block U.S. Customs and Border Protection&nbsp;personnel&nbsp;from searching travelers&rsquo; electronic devices without warrants.&nbsp; This has implications for lawyers who cross in and out of the U.S.&nbsp;with phones and laptops&nbsp; containing&nbsp;confidential client information.&nbsp;&nbsp;The CBP&rsquo;s&nbsp;policy, which the ABA also has <a href="http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/border_searches_confidential_client_info/">questioned</a>, currently authorizes such searches even without a suspicion of wrongdoing.
We first <a href="https://www.thelawforlawyerstoday.com/2017/08/3458/">wrote about the issue</a> last month, when the New York City Bar Association&nbsp;published an ethics opinion raising the client confidentiality issues and advising that in some circumstances lawyers should consider using &ldquo;burner&rdquo; phones, and avoid taking client confidential information across borders.
The ACLU and EFF&rsquo;s lawsuit, in Massachusetts district court, alleges violations of the First and Fourth Amendments on behalf of 11 plaintiffs whose electronic devices were&nbsp;searched as they reentered the U.S.&nbsp; None were subsequently accused of any wrongdoing.
The plaintiffs include journalists, students, an artist, a NASA engineer and a business owner &mdash; but no lawyers.&nbsp; Despite the absence of lawyers from the roster of plaintiffs, the client confidentiality issues are obvious, and have received a lot of notice.&nbsp; See <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/09/13/us/politics/ap-us-government-searches-electronic-devices.html?mwrsm=Email&amp;_r=0">here</a> for the New York Times story on the lawsuit, and&nbsp;<a href="http://bernabepr.blogspot.com/2017/09/given-number-of-recent-reports-that.html">here</a> and <a href="http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/lawyers_must_take_reasonable_steps_to_protect_client_info_in_us_border_sear">here</a> for commentary on the&nbsp;N.Y. City bar&nbsp;ethics opinion.
I&rsquo;d be interested in hearing whether lawyers have personal experience with border searches of their&nbsp;electronic devices.
Stay tuned for additional developments on this issue.

core/freeform

Ethics

Legal Ethics, Professional Responsibility and the Business of Law

Client confidentiality at the border:  suit filed to block warrantless searches of e-devices