Ickes claims that our ruling is sweeping. He warns that "any person
carrying a laptop computer . . . on an international flight would be
subject to a search of the files on the computer hard drive." This prediction
seems far-fetched. Customs agents have neither the time nor
the resources to search the contents of every computer.

Indeed, the fallacy of Ickes’s argument is no better illustrated than
by the facts of his own case. The agents did not inspect the contents
of Ickes’s computer until they had already discovered marijuana paraphernalia,
photo albums of child pornography, a disturbing video
focused on a young ball boy, and an outstanding warrant for Ickes’s
arrest. As a practical matter, computer searches are most likely to
occur where — as here — the traveler’s conduct or the presence of
other items in his possession suggest the need to search further. However,
to state the probability that reasonable suspicions will give rise
to more intrusive searches is a far cry from enthroning this notion as
a matter of constitutional law. The essence of border search doctrine
is a reliance upon the trained observations and judgments of customs
officials, rather than upon constitutional requirements applied to the
inapposite context of this sort of search.