Police say these searches are necessary to stem the flood of illegal drugs overwhelming the country. But a number of legal scholars say the latitude law enforcement is allowed, reinforced by recent Supreme Court decisions, has eroded the protections of the 4th Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures. This tension is behind the Supreme Court's decision in Bond v. U.S. to address whether a Border Patrol agent can legally squeeze the luggage of passengers on a Greyhound bus to see if the bags contain drugs. Border Patrol agents in Texas, where the contested action took place, said feeling luggage at border checkpoints is necessary to fight drugs flowing into the United States from Mexico. We're using unobtrusive methods to detect that.
Officials also say the searches are a minimal inconvenience to public transportation passengers.
Typically, a Border Patrol agent squeezes each piece of luggage after a routine check to ensure each passenger has appropriate citizenship papers. It's a slight infringement, if at all, on their 4th Amendment rights. The only purpose for the officer squeezing is to see if anything of interest is inside. People are more and more willing to give up their rights to get a safer society, but I'm not sure we get that. Several Supreme Court decisions in recent years have expanded the range of searches that may be considered constitutional.