I can sort of see what they mean if I squint some. Sure, destroying evidence to avoid a warrant is a crime and people understand this.
OTOH this was a warrantless search, I’d argue this is materially different. AFAICT, people can still refuse to provide a password to evidence that may incriminate them. I also think scope is much, much larger than searching a home or office. The kind of data people have in their phone is far more private than the kind of stuff people would keep in a filing cabinet and there is far more of it. And a phone is easier to search. I mean, that’s why they put this guy on a list and waited for him to travel somewhere instead getting a warrant.
Myself, I find this kind of searching of citizens to be pretty crazy and I can’t believe it’s allowed. My hope is this case brings this practice to an end.
OTOH this was a warrantless search, I’d argue this is materially different. AFAICT, people can still refuse to provide a password to evidence that may incriminate them. I also think scope is much, much larger than searching a home or office. The kind of data people have in their phone is far more private than the kind of stuff people would keep in a filing cabinet and there is far more of it. And a phone is easier to search. I mean, that’s why they put this guy on a list and waited for him to travel somewhere instead getting a warrant.
Myself, I find this kind of searching of citizens to be pretty crazy and I can’t believe it’s allowed. My hope is this case brings this practice to an end.