by
Craig
F.
Walker/The
Boston
Globe
via
Getty
Images)
Last
week,
attorney
Andrew
Lattarulo
was
on
his
way
home
from
Aruba
when
his
iPhone
15
Pro
Max
was
seized
by
Homeland
Security
and
Border
Control
agents
at
Boston
Logan
International
Airport.
Perhaps
un-coincidentally,
Lattarulo
is
a
well-known
immigration
in
the
Boston
area
—
his
clients
include
the
father
of
a
4-month
old
whose
arrest
by
ICE
drew
public
scrutiny
—
and
has
a
popular
social
media
presence
that
calls
out
problematic
practices
of
immigration
agents
and
is
critical
of
Donald
Trump’s
policies.
As
a
result,
he
filed
a
lawsuit
alleging
violations
of
his
First
and
Fourth
Amendment
rights.
Lattarulo
also
filed
an
emergency
motion
seeking
a
temporary
restraining
order
blocking
the
search
of
his
phone
and
its
return,
as
it
contains
confidential
client
information,
as
well
as
privileged
information
between
himself
and
other
attorneys.
As
stated
in
the
motion,
“The
seizure
was
made
eight
hours
after
plaintiff
had
been
inspected
by
United
States
Customs
and
Border
Protection
at
a
border
crossing.
Plaintiff’s
phone
was
unlawfully
seized
and
most
likely
searched
in
violation
of
plaintiff’s
First
and
Fourth
Amendments,
and
the
constitutional
rights
of
his
clients.”
District
of
Massachusetts
Judge
Allison
D.
Burroughs granted
the
TRO,
barring
the
government
from
searching
the
phone
or
analyzing
any
data
that
may
have
already
been
collected.
Lattarulo’s
attorneys,
Mary
Lemay
and
Patrick
Hanley
from
Butters
Brazilian,
said,
“We
believe
attorney
Lattarulo
was
targeted
because
he
represents
clients
in
immigration-related
proceedings,
and
he
has
amplified
the
government’s
own
enforcement
priorities
via
social
media
to
immigrant
communities
and
anyone
else
who
might
be
interested.”
“Public
criticism
of
our
government
is
protected
speech
under
the
First
Amendment.
We
initiated
this
suit
to
protect
not
only
attorney
Lattarulo’s
constitutional
rights,
but
also
those
of
his
clients.”
But
this
early
success
may
not
translate
to
ultimate
victory.
In
2021,
Texas
immigration
attorney
Adam
A.
Malik
had
his
phone
seized
by
border
agents.
The
Fifth
Circuit
ruled
DHS’s
use
of
a
filter
team
to
sort
out
any
privileged
materials
was
sufficient
to
protect
Malik’s
clients,
and
that
the
government’s
asserted
connection
between
the
attorney
and
an
arms
dealer
created
probable
cause
even
if
Malik
is
correct
that
the
connection
“appears
dubious
in
hindsight.”
Kathryn
Rubino
is
a
Senior
Editor
at
Above
the
Law,
host
of
The
Jabot
podcast,
and
co-host
of
Thinking
Like
A
Lawyer.
AtL
tipsters
are
the
best,
so
please
connect
with
her.
Feel
free
to
email
her
with
any
tips,
questions,
or
comments
and
follow
her
on
Twitter
@Kathryn1 or
Mastodon
@[email protected].