Gov. Rick Perry announced he had added legislation that would make it illegal for TSA agents to engage in “intrusive touching” at airports security checkpoints without probable cause to the list of items for the legislature to consider during the special session.Grits approves of this move for at least two reasons. First, as I wrote last fall, I despise the idiocy, intrusiveness, and redundancy of post-9/11 airport security, and I want to see a re-assertion of the 4th and 10th (if not even the 9th) Amendments on all available fronts. Whether or not federal courts would allow it is both a legal and a political matter, but as a political stance I'm happy to see it. Further, I'm not quite as morose about the bill's legal prospects as Conor Friedersdorf at The Atlantic who says it's a "publicity stunt that's doomed to fail." I might have thought so until I saw the disingenuous arguments TSA and its supporters made in reaction to the bill, and then I began to wonder if, underneath all the Anti-federalist mumbo jumbo and bipartisan Big Government chutzpah, the Emperor really isn't wearing any clothes? Perhaps we'll now find out?
The measure had previously failed to muster enough support in the Texas Senate to come up for a vote because the Justice Department wrote a scathing memo against the bill, which threatened legal action against the state, and the measure became enmeshed in Senate politics.
There are questions about what impact the legislation might have since airport security is a federal matter.
I do agree it will be difficult to overcome the trend over recent decades of federal courts accumulating power instead of disseminating it to the states on "national security" grounds, a pattern of court precedent that one imagines may be too powerful to overcome. But the reason has as much to do with politics as with constitutional argument. For that reason, the bill is worth supporting if only to begin chipping away around the edges at federal overreach on security matters, and I couldn't agree more that "it's nice to see that it is suddenly good populist politics to push back against War on Terror national-security excesses."
MORE: From the Texas Tribune.
RELATED: "A Tainted Texplanation on TSA 'groping' bill."
.jpg)
31 comments:
"There are questions about what impact the legislation might have since airport security is a federal matter."
I'm not so sure airport security is a federal matter. Airports are locally owned, and all security aspects of it are under the jurisdiction of the local authorities. The only place you see federal control is in that small, defined area prior to boarding commercial flights. However, none of this security applies to private or chartered operations.
ANON 8:37...wrongo:
Airport security is under the direction of the TSA which is under Homeland Security. Airport operational security including baggage control, ramp operations and facilities are ALL under the TSA. Not sure where you got your information.
It is far better to die in the land of the free than to live in the Soviet Union or China!
If you can't walk up and do it to a policeman you shouldn't be able to do it to a citizen, even if they want to get on a plane. The only security that has ever worked is the passengers themselves. The TSA is just for show and government jobs.
I doubt that Perry will be able to overrule the TSA, but it is an interesting double standard when TDCJ guards are instructed to "pat search" visitors in a far more physically intrusive way than I have ever been searched by any airport security staff. If Perry doesn;t want Texans to be searched when they fly, why does he think it is OK for the SAME Texans to be manhandled when they visit their inmate family or friends?
What is more important really, the safety of strangers on a plane, or the failure to limit one source of contraband into a prison?
"'Rick Perry: Don't Touch My Junk'"
Leave his brain alone.
Hook Em Horns said...
"Airport security is under the direction of the TSA which is under Homeland Security... Not sure where you got your information."
I got my info from being a licensed pilot. Airport security is not under some blanket jurisdiction by the TSA. I walk in an out of airports all the time, carrying concealed weapons and guns of all types, and I never get ramp checked, baggage checked, or even have to take my shoes off. According to a deputy at one of the airports I frequent, TSA ISN'T ALLOWED TO CHECK ME. The reason is because I'm not getting on a commercial flight. The very same ramp you might walk across to board a regional flight, is the same one I use to walk right by you and board my own airplane, or a charted flight.
sunray's wench said...
"What is more important really, the safety of strangers on a plane,.."
That's just it. You're not any safer on an airplane than you were before the TSA started their idiotic violations of the US Constitution. If I really wanted to kill a bunch of people on the airport grounds, or bring down an airliner, it would be so easy. I certainly wouldn't need a gun, bomb, or even a boxcutter to do it.
ok what about the searchs TDCJ emloyees had to endure every day they go to work?
The whole time I was reading this I was thinking the same thing as Sunray's Wrench. I am groped every time I go to the prison. Why is it okay for TDCJ to do that to me, but not the airport? TDCJ is trying to prevent contraband, TSA is trying to prevent terrorists turning planes in to bombs. TDCJ knows they aren't stopping contraband through those pat searches, not sure how effective the TSA believes they are.
Just another way for Perry to say, hey look at me I want to be President.
God what ever you do don't let this fool be president. Hopefully the same fools that voted for Bush are a little smarter this time around?
VERY nice misdirection of the discussion by comparing free citizens coming and going on their private business through a facility they have paid for while protected by the Bill of Rights to convicted felons held against their will and being punished. You folks should run for office or at least be spokespeople for some oppressive bureaucracy.
Visitors going to see inmates are NOT convicted felons...
8:37 ~ 7:02: It's pretty clear the Governor is talking about TSA pat-downs at commercial airports that carry passenger traffic. Since we are splitting hairs (something I do everyday) lets be clear.
The Department of Homeland Security/TSA provides security for airports period. Does not matter how big or small they are or who 'owns them.' The criteria is established by how many passenger seats are on an aircraft or how much cargo it is carrying. Puddle-jumpers do not require the same screening as a passenger jet per se.
Tell ya what, just truck on through a TSA checkpoint and when you get arrested, call me from the jail. After, of course, you have told them they 'cannot screen you.'
Thank you, Anon 9:16. We definitely are NOT convicted felons. We are school teachers and business men/women and state employees ...
Too often the families are treated as if they are felons, but we are generally just citizens whose family members made a terrible choice.
Susan Fenner, Executive Director, Texas Inmate Families Association (TIFA)
@ Robert Langham ~ read what people actually post first before adding your own comments, not what you think you saw.
@Lee:
You're right, but the problem is that every morning when I wake up, I do so in the Land-of-the-Not-Quite-as-Free-as-We-Were-Yesterday. (Not to mention that there hasn't been a Soviet Union for 20 years as of this December, but I take your point.)
Questioning and pushing back against the government's purported "authority" is the sole reason that this ever was the Land of the Free. More to the point, it is the only way that we can ever hope to preserve what freedoms we have left, and to try to stem the erosion already under way.
Like Grits, I am a bit uncomfortable to admit that this marks two things on which I have to agree with Gov. Goodhair in as many weeks (the TSA limitation issue and the texting-while-driving ban). The difference between me and the Guv is that I actually believe that government needs to be quite limited in its power, whereas he's just trying to keep getting re-elected.
Hook Em Horns said...
"The criteria is established by how many passenger seats are on an aircraft or how much cargo it is carrying. Puddle-jumpers do not require the same screening as a passenger jet per se..
Tell ya what, just truck on through a TSA checkpoint and when you get arrested, call me from the jail. After, of course, you have told them they 'cannot screen you.'"
I do quite a bit of flying myself. About four times a week average. Passengers getting on "puddle jumpers" get screened the same as on 757s. If you don't think so, then buy a seat on a Continental regional flight and find out. I promise you, you will be walking shoeless and getting groped like the rest of the sheep before you get on that twin-engine turboprop Saab.
The difference is in the big commercial carriers vs. private aircraft and commercial charters (which, can seat upwards of 30 passengers.) I will never get arrested, because I never get screened. I never get screened because I don't have to go through TSA checkpoints. I don't even go through the same line that you do. I walk right past it, with the blessing of every law officer in sight. I walk right by you on the ramp, and go load my baggage, gun cases labeled "guns", concealed handguns, flammable liquids, box cutters, and pocket knives on my own airplane and wave to the ramp attendant and fuel truck driver on my way out. I will preflight, initiate startup, and call the tower for departure clearance and taxi instructions. I will then taxi my gun and weapon-laden airplane full of high-octane aviation fuel within 50 to 100 feet of your passenger plane on my way down the taxiway. Who knows, I might even line up behind your airplane waiting to depart. I will do this very same routine tomorrow when I go pick up my wife, and as I have done for decades.
Now, if you can ever bring yourself to stop acting like sheep, and instead, start asking why the dog and pony show you endure at the airport has to take place, then maybe you will come to the realization that it is just that - a dog and pony show that serves no real security purpose. Instead it is just usurping your rights to make you "feel" better.
Let's try this again:
The Aviation and Transportation Security Act generally required that by November 19, 2002 all passenger screening must be conducted by Federal employees.
Security at the airport may be provided by private contractors, local (Barney Fife) law enforcement or anyone who fits 'federal' criteria HOWEVER the AUTHORITY is FEDERAL.
You do raise a valid point so tomorrow, I am going to call Washington and find out why things are the way you 'say they are.' Thanks!
Hook Em Horns said...
"The Aviation and Transportation Security Act generally required that by November 19, 2002 all passenger screening must be conducted by Federal employees."
Yes, but that doesn't mean that everyone in that terminal has to be screened! It only means that federal employees have to do the screening. And, TSA employees only operate in their own "secure" area. They have no authority to "screen" general aviation or private charter passengers in other parts of the airport.
ANONYMOUS, You are officially an idiot!
49 CFR, Subchapter C - Civil Aviation Security
Security Regulations
Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Chapter XII, Subchapter C contains Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) rules for civil aviation security.
Part 1542 Airport Security
Requires airport operators to adopt and carry out a security program approved by TSA. It describes requirements for security programs, including establishing secured areas, air operations areas, security identification display areas, and access control systems. This part also contains requirements for fingerprint-based criminal history record checks of specified individuals. This part describes the requirements related to Security Directives issued to airport operators. Read History
Part 1544 Aircraft Operator Security: Air Carriers and Commercial Operators
Applies to certain aircraft operators holding operating certificates for scheduled passenger operations, public charter passenger operations, private charter passenger operations, and other aircraft operators. This part requires such operators to adopt and carry out a security program approved by TSA. It contains requirements for screening of passengers and property. This part also describes requirements applicable to law enforcement officers flying armed aboard an aircraft, as well as requirements for fingerprint based criminal history record checks of specified individuals. This part describes the requirements related to Security Directives issued to aircraft operators. Read History
Part 1548 Indirect Air Carrier Security
Applies to indirect air carriers, such as freight forwarders. It requires such carriers to adopt and carry out a security program and describes requirements for preventing the carriage of unauthorized explosives or incendiaries aboard passenger aircraft. Read History
Part 1549 Certified Cargo Screening Program Provides the regulatory requirements for each facility applying for or certified by TSA as a certified cargo screening facility (CCSF) to screen cargo that will be transported on a passenger aircraft operated under a full program under 49 CFR 1544.101, or a foreign air carrier operating under a program under 49 CFR 1546.101. Read History
Part 1550 Aircraft Security Under General Operating and Flight Rules
Applies to the operation of aircraft for which there are no security requirements in other parts of Chapter XII, including general aviation aircraft. Read History
ONCE AGAIN, I DONT CARE WHETHER THEY GRAB YOUR CROTCH OR NOT BUT THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY. CAN YOU POSSIBLY NOT UNDERSTAND THIS?
No, once again, you are a blind sheep and can't comprehend the laws you post. No law you posted said that the TSA has to, or can shakedown everyone that enters or exits that terminal building, or enters or exits the ramp. It's a dog and pony show. GET OVER IT!
By the way, I flew into KBPT yesterday, following in a Continental regional flight, and strolled through their terminal carrying a concealed weapon, a pocket knife, and walking a dog on a leash. I didn't walk through any scanners, or get screened, or have to take my shoes off. I didn't have to slow down for anyone, or speak to anyone about anything. I'll do the same thing today.
Ask yourself this: If I'm breaking the law, then why isn't anyone stopping me?
(Baaah, baaah)
Perhaps someone could draw a cartoon for this moron...
That's right. you shot your mouth off about something you really don't know anything about, and so you ended up putting your own foot in it. Now, the only thing you can do is resort to insults. Your just another one of those swivel-chair computer jocks who doesn't get out much, and makes idoitic uninformed posts about criminal justice, law, TYC, and anything else that Grits happens to blog about. Get a life. You might actually learn something. Or, instead of waisting your time on Facebook, or thinking up insults to hurl at me, you might look under FAA regs for the definition of "sterile area." I'll help you out here. Evidently you need it.
What is a sterile area? U.S. Statute 49 CFR 1540.5 defines it as "a portion of an airport defined in the airport security program that provides passengers access to boarding aircraft and to which the access generally is controlled by TSA, or by an aircraft operator under part 1544 of this chapter or a foreign air carrier under part 1546 of this chapter, through the screening of persons and property."
Did you read that closely? Pay careful attention to the part that says "controlled by the TSA." Because, TSA doesn't control the whole airport. If you are within a "non-sterile" area of an airport, the statutes and regulations that you cited regarding the TSA do not apply. At that point, the only thing that governs what I can have in my possession is state law.
PS. Baaah, baaah!
When the day comes, and it will come, that you are confronted by a VIPR team that SEARCHES your ass, then cry all the way to the ACLU. You sir are an IDIOT. Period. Case closed. MORON.
Nobody is going to "search my ass." They don't have to. I frequent these airports, and they KNOW WHAT I CARRY. IT'S NO SECRET. I often carry cases which are obviously GUN CASES. In the past two days, I walked too and from the ramp with a dog on a leash that was not a service animal for Christ sake! You need to get a life, and get up from in front of that computer and LEARN SOMETHING. Especially, you need to learn the laws regarding some of the claptrap you spew, and stop acting like sheep! The TSA DOES NOT HAVE TOTAL CONTROL OF AN AIRPORT. THEY ONLY HAVE CONTROL OF STERILE AREAS. LOOK IT UP! They cannot tell me what I can or can't carry on a private or charter aircraft, and they don't even try. Only state law or owner of the aircraft can do that.
(baaah, baaah)
Anonymous, this is WHY you are an IDIOT. I am hardly a 'sheep' defending the TSA/Homeland Security, never have defended their actions. Whilst you have been screaming for the past few days, YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT. SHUT THE HOLE ON YOUR FACE AND LISTEN...L-I-S-T-E-N!
AIRPORT SECURITY IS UNDER THE TSA/DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY. THE PHYSICAL SECURITY 'ARRANGEMENTS' FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM INCLUDE PRIVATE CONTRACTORS, LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AND A MYRIAD OF FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES.
SHUT UP! NOT YET....
I AM NOT...REPEAT...NOT DEFENDING THE TSA SO REACH AROUND AND PULL YOUR PANTIES OUT OF YOUR CRACK!
GOOGLE VIPR IDIOT AND WHILE YOUR AT IT, PERHAPS YOU SHOULD VERSE YOURSELF IN THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (YOU KNOW, THE TSA'S PARENT AGENCY) AND THE LAWS THAT GOVERN THEM.
IN CLOSING...AIRPORT SECURITY IS A FEDERAL MATTER. PERIOD. HOW IT IS CONDUCTED IS ALSO DECIDED BY FEDERAL LAW. YOU ARE CORRECT, DIP-SHIT, THAT STATE LAW'S ARE ENFORCED IN NON-STERILE AREAS BUT SHOW ME BY STATUTE WHERE THE FEDS HAVE NO JURISDICTION OVER AN AIRPORT, AND DUMB-ASS, DON'T LIMIT YOURSELF TO THE LETTERS 'T S A' I KNOW IT'S HARD BUT TRY TO EXPAND YOUR 'LEGAL' KNOWLEDGE BEYOND YOUR EXPERIENCE PUDDLE JUMPING...IDIOT!
The ignorant and uninformed Hookem' Horns said:
"SHOW ME BY STATUTE WHERE THE FEDS HAVE NO JURISDICTION OVER AN AIRPORT,"
Oh, so now you think I have to prove a negative? LOLOLOLOL! And, no, not all airport security or operations are under the TSA or Homeland security. As a matter of fact, there are over 2,100 airports in the US that do not have any TSA presence whatsoever. And, a proportionate share of more than 200,000 GA aircraft that are responsible for 75% of all air traffic operate out of these airports.
And, to quote an expert:
"The nation’s 5,220 public and private airports and 294,000 general aviation aircraft are not ruled by uniform federal regulations on securing planes, checking passengers or requiring flight plans" said Glen Winn, a 29-year airline industry veteran who served as head of security for United and Continental airlines.
Also, if you are still sucking on that bong and believe that TSA has total jurisdiction over all airports, airlines, and airplanes, then you better tell this airline, because they evidently haven't heard your rantings:
http://www.seaportair.com/features/
I couldn't help but notice how seaport airlines HIDES it's propeller in it's on line presentation. PUDDLE-JUMPER!
Distractions aside, it's a shame the Texas House failed to pass the Bill. The TSA and feds have over-stepped their authority. People should not be treated like prisoners who aren't in prison...unless you count this as a police state.
Hook Em Horns said...
"I couldn't help but notice how seaport airlines HIDES it's propeller in it's on line presentation. PUDDLE-JUMPER!"
Airlines are airlines regardless of the size of the airplane. I'll take a ride on a P-12 with leather seats and legroom any day over a mouse-infested 757 with my knees in my chest. And, from check-in to check out, Seaport and other small airlines will get you there faster than the big boys. And, with the comfort and service you don't see from the big boys.
Post a Comment