Even if you haven’t done anything wrong, it’s never a good idea to give your phone to the police. But international travelers at American airports often have no choice — even if they’re US citizens.
When Minnesota labor organizer Janette Zahia Corcelius returned home from a three-week trip to Europe in late April, she was detained and questioned by tax agents in the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. Before they let him go, agents searched his luggage twice, seized political books he had bought abroad, and took his phone — which has not been returned, according to a complaint filed in federal court in Minnesota.
Is it legal for Customs and Border Protection to take your phone? And to keep it? The Council on American-Islamic Relations, which sued the government on Corcelius’ behalf, doesn’t think so. A civil rights group says it has been targeted for protesting the ICE raid in Minneapolis. The lawsuit Corcelius filed with the Department of Homeland Security alleges that the seizure of his phone violates the Fourth Amendment, as well as CBP’s own search and seizure laws.
But the problem goes beyond a single phone search. CAIR says CBP is conducting “systematic” investigations of activist networks, using counterterrorism language and tools to target left-wing critics and activists, in line with President Donald Trump’s efforts to go after what he calls “Violent-Wing Extremists, including Anarchists and Anti-Fascists.”
According to the complaint, Corcelius called his lawyer after being pulled aside for questioning. He gave the CBP supervisor on duty his phone so they could speak to his attorney. He was then told that his phone had been taken. His other location was searched by both CBP agents and agents with Homeland Security Investigations, the branch of Immigration and Customs Enforcement that specializes in international crime, drug trafficking, and national security threats.
CBP can search two types of people’s phones and other things at the border: basic searches, where they can only look at what’s on the phone while it’s in flight mode, and advanced forensic searches, where they connect the phone to an external device that allows them to go through and copy its contents. American citizens cannot be barred from re-entering the United States even if they refuse a phone search, but their phone can be seized – and if agents can unlock it, manually, with their biometrics, or with tools made by companies like Israel-based Cellebrite, which can unlock and extract data from phones, their contents can also be searched. CBP did not respond The Vergerequest for comment in advance of publication.
Since Trump returned to office, immigrants, tourists and other non-citizens have been deported or denied entry to the US — and in one case, arrested and allegedly “violently interrogated” by customs agents — after their phones were searched by CBP. Activists, including members of a convoy that brought aid to Cuba due to the ongoing US embargo on the island nation, had their phones confiscated at the border.
CBP phone searches remain rare, but are increasing. The agency conducted 55,318 searches of phones and other electronic devices in fiscal year 2025, up from 41,767 in 2023 — a 32 percent increase.
But CAIR’s complaint notes that border agents can seize a person’s property at the point of entry only if they “have reasonable cause to believe that any law or order enforced by Customs or Border Protection or Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been violated.” There is an exception to that rule, however: “national security concerns.”
After the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk last September, Trump issued an executive order labeling “Antifa” as a terrorist organization, even though it is not a real organization. Trump also issued a presidential memorandum calling for “a new law enforcement strategy that investigates all those involved in these criminal and terrorist plots.” Presidential adviser Stephen Miller described this as “the entire government’s approach to ending left-wing terrorism.” By associating Kirk’s killer with so-called “antifa terrorists” – and vilifying any opponents as terrorists – the administration is dedicated to harassing and intimidating anyone who might be critical of the government.
The following January, the administration described resistance to ICE’s brutal attacks in the Twin Cities as a coordinated conspiracy and announced that the FBI was investigating Signal conversations where Minnesotans were following and organizing against ICE. Miller called Alex Pretti, one of two DHS employees killed in Minneapolis, a “domestic terrorist” and “would-be murderer.”
Corcelius was among the Minnesotans who opposed ICE’s presence in the Twin Cities. In addition to her editing, she shared news on social media about a Minneapolis City Council resolution encouraging European institutions to divest from companies that contract with DHS, according to the complaint.
“These laws that try to bring terrorism into the domestic policy debate are exactly what we’ve feared would happen for a long time,” John Fossum, a CAIR staff attorney representing Corcelius, said. The Verge. “The use of these types of domestic terrorist designations allows the administration to tap into these national security apparatuses that allow them to search, arrest, and target people in ways they are not allowed to do under domestic law.”
Corcelius is asking the federal court to order CBP to stop any enhanced search of his phone, delete any information collected from it during the search, and return his phone and other belongings. He’s also asking the court to bar DHS from conducting random searches of his property in the future, and to demand that the department change its policy on random phone searches.
Even if the court agrees with Corcelius, it won’t necessarily stop CBP from targeting activists in the future. In 2024, a federal judge in New York ruled that CBP cannot search travelers’ phones without a warrant — but that ruling only applies to the Eastern District of New York, which includes John F. Kennedy Airport in Queens. But in 2021, the U.S. appeals court ruled that CBPs should be enforced it can be search for out-of-warranty travel accessories. The result is a series of regulations across the country. In some jurisdictions, CBP may conduct warrantless, but not formal, background checks. In others, CBP can do whatever they want. Similarly, any decision in the Corcelius case could end up being applicable only in Minnesota.
As of this writing, he still hasn’t found his phone.
