Us Border Agents Searching Phones Reveal Record Searches, Little Transparency
A record tally of device examinations thrust the issue of us border agents searching phones into the public eye: U. S. Customs and Border Protection data show 55, 318 overall examinations in 2024-25, even as key context about who was targeted and where remains absent.
What do the official numbers show?
Verified facts: U. S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data show 55, 318 device examinations in 2024-25, an increase cited as roughly 17% from the prior year and 32% from two years earlier. CBP data also state that 0. 01% of international passengers arriving in the U. S. were searched over the past three fiscal years. CBP published a 2025 device search report that did not disclose the national origin breakdown of those examined nor whether most searches occurred at airports or land borders.
Analysis: The raw totals indicate a clear upward trajectory in device examinations. The absence of a national-origin breakdown and the omission of location data in CBP’s 2025 device search report make it difficult to assess how concentrated examinations are by traveler nationality or mode of entry. That gap constrains public understanding of operational patterns and the scale of any cross-border concerns tied to specific entry points.
Us Border Agents Searching Phones: What devices were added and what changed?
Verified facts: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) updated a directive effective Jan. 1 that expands the list of electronic items subject to border review. New additions include smartwatches, SIM cards and USB flash drives. The directive also adds GPS systems, vehicle infotainment systems and unmanned aircraft systems. The 2018 directive previously covered searching, reviewing, retaining and sharing information from computers, tablets, removable media, disks, drives, tapes, mobile phones, cameras, music and other media players and any other communication, electronic or digital devices subject to inbound and outbound border searches.
Analysis: The DHS expansion formalizes review authority over smaller and more embedded storage media and new classes of connected devices. That change increases the universe of items CBP officers may examine at ports of entry. The additions combined with rising examination totals help explain why travelers report seeing a broader range of device checks than in prior years.
Who is responding and what remains opaque?
Verified facts: Karine Martel, spokesperson for the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), said the Canadian border is moving in the opposite direction and that examinations of electronic devices should not be routine; Martel noted that the CBSA in recent years began requiring chiefs and superintendents to approve and review such examinations. Pete Hoekstra, U. S. Ambassador to Canada, issued a statement characterizing concerns about device searches as media-driven and intended to cause fear among travelers.
Analysis: Those official responses show divergent emphasis: one agency stressing internal safeguards and higher thresholds, the other emphasizing reassurance about public reaction. Yet the CBP’s own report withholding breakdowns by country and location leaves a transparency gap that neither posture closes. Without disclosure of where searches occur and which nationalities are most affected, public officials, travellers and oversight bodies lack the detail needed to evaluate whether policy and practice strike an appropriate balance between security and privacy.
Accountability conclusion: The documented rise in device examinations, the DHS directive’s expanded device list and CBP’s decision not to disclose key breakdowns together point to a need for clearer public reporting and operational thresholds. For travelers and foreign governments to assess risk and rights, CBP should publish location- and nationality-specific breakdowns and DHS should clarify the criteria used to target devices. Until that transparency is provided, the debate over the scale and appropriateness of us border agents searching phones will remain driven by numbers without full context.
