Reminder that the "border" (zone) is / can be considered 100 mi (160 km) inland:
* https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
* https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/pslr/vol124/iss2/3/
* https://ballsandstrikes.org/legal-culture/border-patrol-100-...
* https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/border-zone
* https://elibrary.law.psu.edu/pslr/vol124/iss2/3/
* https://ballsandstrikes.org/legal-culture/border-patrol-100-...
> The immediate explanation is the substantial eastward jog created by Suisun and Grizzly Bay. This would follow from 33 CFR 2.20, defining the territorial sea baseline, following the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone. The zone would fall just short of Lake Tahoe. It's based on tidal waters, see 33 CFR 329.12 for similar definition of the US baseline in terms of waterbodies subject to tidal action.
33 CFR 329.12 (https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/33/329.12) says:
> (b) Bays and estuaries. Regulatory jurisdiction extends to the entire surface and bed of all waterbodies subject to tidal action. Jurisdiction thus extends to the edge (as determined by paragraph (a)(2) of this section) of all such waterbodies, even though portions of the waterbody may be extremely shallow, or obstructed by shoals, vegetation, or other barriers. Marshlands and similar areas are thus considered “navigable in law,” but only so far as the area is subject to inundation by the mean high waters.
It’s not the same.