Phone SeizedUnited StatesGetting a seized phone back, and how long copies are kept
Getting a seized phone back, and how long copies are kept
What you must do, what you can refuse, and what they can do
Every claim below links to the law it comes from, with the wording quoted so you can check it yourself.
What they can do
A power the law gives them over you or your device.
CBP can keep copies of your device’s data beyond that twenty-one day default as an exception — where, based on what was found, there is probable cause it holds digital contraband or evidence of a law CBP enforces.
CBP Directive No. 3340-049B §§5.6.1, 5.6.4 (eff. 1 Jan 2026)
“CBP may retain copies of information from an electronic device when, based on a review of the information encountered or on other facts and circumstances, they determine there is probable cause to believe the information contains digital contraband or evidence of a violation of law that CBP is authorized to enforce or administer—Following the completion of the border search, CBP will retain no copies of the information beyond twenty-one (21) calendar days following the conclusion of the border search unless retention is permissible or required consistent with sections 5.6.1, 5.6.2, or 5.6.3.”
Read it at cbp.govquote checked 2026-09-08
A warrant that lets police copy your device’s data also lets them review that copy later, on their own schedule rather than on the spot, unless the warrant itself says otherwise.
Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e)(2)(B)
“A warrant under Rule 41(e)(2)(A) may authorize the seizure of electronic storage media or the seizure or copying of electronically stored information. Unless otherwise specified, the warrant authorizes a later review of the media or information consistent with the warrant.”
Read it at law.cornell.eduquote checked 2026-09-08
Limits on them
A rule that constrains them, or a remedy you can use.
In Utah, police may not obtain the stored data on an electronic device without a search warrant issued on probable cause — one example of a state going beyond the federal baseline.
Utah H.B. 57 (2019), enacting Utah Code §77-23c-102(1)(a)
“a law enforcement agency may not obtain, without a search—warrant issued by a court upon probable cause—the location information, stored data, or transmitted data of an electronic device”
Read it at le.utah.govquote checked 2026-09-08
A warrant used to seize or copy your device’s data must identify the person or property to be searched and seized, and designate the magistrate judge to whom it must be returned.
Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(e)(2)(A)
“the warrant must identify the person or property to be searched, identify any person or property to be seized, and designate the magistrate judge to whom it must be returned.”
Read it at law.cornell.eduquote checked 2026-09-08
CBP will retain no copies of your device’s data beyond twenty-one calendar days following the conclusion of a border search, unless retention is permissible or required consistent with sections 5.6.1, 5.6.2, or 5.6.3 of the directive — for example, where CBP determines there is probable cause to believe the data contains digital contraband or evidence of a violation of law CBP is authorized to enforce.
CBP Directive No. 3340-049B §§5.6.1, 5.6.4 (eff. 1 Jan 2026)
“CBP may retain copies of information from an electronic device when, based on a review of the information encountered or on other facts and circumstances, they determine there is probable cause to believe the information contains digital contraband or evidence of a violation of law that CBP is authorized to enforce or administer—Following the completion of the border search, CBP will retain no copies of the information beyond twenty-one (21) calendar days following the conclusion of the border search unless retention is permissible or required consistent with sections 5.6.1, 5.6.2, or 5.6.3.”
Read it at cbp.govquote checked 2026-09-08
You are entitled to ask a court to order the return of property — including your phone or a copy of its data — that was searched or seized unlawfully, by filing a motion in the district where it was seized.
Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g)
“A person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure of property or by the deprivation of property may move for the property's return. The motion must be filed in the district where the property was seized.”
Read it at law.cornell.eduquote checked 2026-09-08
Asking a court for it back
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(g) gives a specific route: “A person aggrieved by an unlawful search and seizure of property or by the deprivation of property may move for the property’s return.” The motion has to go to the right place — “the district where the property was seized” — not just any federal court.
What a warrant already allows with a copy
If a warrant authorized copying your device’s data in the first place, Rule 41(e)(2)(A) requires the warrant to designate the magistrate judge to whom it must be returned — part of the paper trail for what happens to your property afterward. Rule 41(e)(2)(B) then covers what happens to the copy itself: the warrant “authorizes a later review of the media or information consistent with the warrant,” on the government’s own timeline, unless the warrant itself limits that. A copy taken under a valid warrant does not have to be reviewed on the spot.
At the border, there’s an actual number
Away from a warrant entirely, CBP’s own directive sets a specific figure for device data collected at the border: no retention of copies beyond twenty-one calendar days after the search ends, unless the agency has probable cause to believe the information holds digital contraband or evidence of a law violation CBP enforces, in which case it may keep the copy longer. See CBP and your phone at the U.S. border for the rest of that directive — it applies only at the border, not to phones seized elsewhere.
Away from the border, we have not found a general rule
Outside CBP’s border-specific 21-day figure, and outside asking a court case-by-case under Rule 41(g) or challenging the scope of a review under Rule 41(e)(2)(B), this site has not found a general federal rule that fixes how long a copy of your phone’s data may be kept once ordinary domestic law enforcement has extracted it. That is a statement about what we could not find, not a claim that no such rule exists anywhere — if you know of one, please tell us so it can be checked and added.
One state’s answer
Some states go further than the federal baseline on the front end — requiring a warrant before the data can be obtained at all, rather than only regulating what happens to a copy afterward. Utah is one example: under H.B. 57 (2019), “a law enforcement agency may not obtain, without a search warrant issued by a court upon probable cause, the location information, stored data, or transmitted data of an electronic device.” That is a state statute, and it does not apply outside Utah.
Last reviewed 2026-09-08. Next review due 2027-03-08. No lawyer has reviewed this page — see [email protected] if you think something here is wrong.