The feds are charging Samuel Tunick for destroying his phone at the border. Court documents show that they refused him a lawyer and lied about why he was searched.
One of the unfortunate quirks of the American system is that you can’t lie to the government, but the government can lie to you. Samuel Tunick found himself on the receiving end of this setup last year at Atlanta International Airport. When agents from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) asked for his phone password, he allegedly gave them a self-destruct code that wiped his data. Tunick now faces five years in prison for destroying evidence.
It turns out that the feds were lying to Tunick the entire time. A new court filing, first reported by 404 Media, shows that the DHS had sent out an order to seize Tunick’s phone over his involvement in environmentalist protests in Atlanta. When he landed at the airport, however, agents told Tunick that they were looking for “kiddie porn” and he would be allowed to leave with his phone if he cooperated. They also repeatedly denied him access to his lawyer when he asked.
“There can be no real debate that if law enforcement had acted similarly elsewhere in Atlanta, their actions would be unconstitutional. But the government says it was entitled to act this way because Mr. Tunick was returning from an international vacation” in the Dominican Republic…
The feds are charging Samuel Tunick for destroying his phone at the border. Court documents show that they refused him a lawyer and lied about why he was searched.
Technically, he didn’t destroy his own phone, the gov’t did when they entered the duress code which he gave them. This won’t have them thinking twice about entering codes, but should.
Tactics such as this is also something PFRs who travel overseas should be aware of upon returning home, though PFRs are already the exception to the secondary and search rule.
Swastika of the 21st Century
Written by Quiet too long 10/24/2026
When considering data on any device, we look at the security and protections within those devices. In most devices, one thing that strikes me is the fact that all browsers want you to sync across every device that can run the same browser. The app either wants or encourages you to sync those browsers to all your devices, and every time I turn off sync, it tries to get me to turn it back on.
I believe this is done not to simplify your life, but to create a record of who you are as a person. If you are ever questioned or searched by authorities, it makes it easier for them to determine who you are associated with, who your partners are, what you buy or purchase, and other details about your life—and whether you have money to defend yourself, and if so, can they break you in a court of law.
The pornography claim at police checkpoints in airports, at D.W.I. checkpoints, and at speeding stops—it’s the superior exception used to give a wink or nod to the judge to ignore facts and look the other way while encouraging the public to shrug off unconstitutional or illegal searches that happen every day without counsel. Once that precedent is put in place, the superior amended Smith v. Doe will become the swastika sticker of the 21st century complete with street checkpoints, and we are already there thanks to Americans that believe our constitution is a white roll of toilet paper with no benefits.
The United States has been fighting constitutional issues since the 1960s, when certain claims of supremacy with benefits and privilege first began to be challenged as wrong. We have killed off races, we had civil wars, we had legal battles, and countless disputes afterward in our American courts and around the world. In American terms, these conflicts have involved territory conflicts, terrorists, activists, racial groups, and out-of-the-box thinkers, or simply intelligent people and people that simply knew too much and challenged accepted ideas as totally wrong. Governments will either use these people or dispose of them when they are no longer useful, as history has proven time and time again.
Will it end? No. Can we fight it? No. It is already here, and the government will continue to adapt and deny access until it has the powers it needs, as it always has.
We, as American citizens who value freedom, should question what this superiorly amended Smith v. Doe case is really doing and for whom.
What started with a double lightning bolt unlocked is now locked into the mark.
Any single case that can claim superiority, over our states and federal constitutions. Then wipe out all protections by combining civil courts and criminal penalties without constitutional amendments, and include unwarranted searches and/or seizures, and continue to strip away the principles our forefathers fought and died for.
Has dangerously become criminal and treasonous to anyone that accepts or upholds it as precedent. In earlier times, such an act would have been considered an act of war against the government itself.
It’s the conundrum of the lock and the reason to look at how and why the mark keeps returning..
Disclaimer: This article is protected speech under what’s left of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and/or any other protections that may still exist in a civil atmosphere. It contains historical events, legal precedent, government actions, and public policy. References to symbols, comparisons, and historical events are presented as mostly factual commentary. Readers should examine the evidence, consider the arguments presented, and decide for themselves the how and the why. If they believe these restrictions are civil and non-punitive, they should be willing to live under them themselves as all laws are supposed to be balanced.