Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court Limits on TSA Searches
Schneier ^ | 08 July 2009 | Bruce Schneier

Posted on 07/09/2009 12:41:39 PM PDT by BGHater

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 07/09/2009 12:41:39 PM PDT by BGHater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BGHater

Here’s your cocaine, your counterfeit $100 bills, and your child pornography. Have a nice flight sir.


2 posted on 07/09/2009 12:45:58 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Do you want them going through your ipod and laptop as you pass through security? Not to check for terrorist documents, but to look for improperly ripped mp3s that are hurting Time-Lies-Warner’s bottom line?


3 posted on 07/09/2009 12:50:05 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (There is no truth in the Pravda Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

If the flying public refused to take any flights for one week these pinheads could be brought to heel. I’m doing my part. When they took a half tube of toothpaste from me I made my last flight.


4 posted on 07/09/2009 12:55:29 PM PDT by RobinOfKingston (Democrats, the party of evil. Republicans, the party of stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

TSA: Thousands Standing Around.


5 posted on 07/09/2009 12:56:07 PM PDT by RexBeach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

This is long overdue. An unusually invasive search that is specifically directed toward terrorist threats can be considered “reasonable” given the potential risk to the general public; however, a search of this type that is not so narrowly directed ceases to be “reasonable”.


6 posted on 07/09/2009 12:56:57 PM PDT by steve-b (Intelligent design is to evolutionary biology what socialism is to free-market economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
I don't see how the author of the article or the judge could equate 3 seperate envelopes, each filled with money and a fake passport to a Ron Paul campaigner flying with $4700 in a lockbox.

The fake passports/cash should put up red flags, especially at an airport. They should've waterboarded that sucker on the spot, to make sure there were no terrorists at his destination waiting for 'em.

The Ron Paul campaigner should have been released immediately....and after he accounts for and pulls down all the signs he's put up, they should give him back his lockbox.

7 posted on 07/09/2009 1:16:05 PM PDT by 4woodenboats (Obama Voodoo economics - Thuggery, sleight of hand, temper tantrums & spitting on OUR dreams.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DManA

You’re probably joking about the cocaine, counterfeit money, and child porn. I always wonder what exactly are the laws regarding searches and seizures. I thought, for example, that some people get arrested for drugs when they were pulled over for a speeding ticket. If law enforcement people discover evidence of criminality when doing something else, what is the legal status? So if TSA people discover evidence of other crime, what is their legal obligation? I guess these court cases will draw lines around what they do.


8 posted on 07/09/2009 1:22:04 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 4woodenboats

They’re equated because the reaction by TSA was equal: nothing to do with airline security. Maybe the guy with multiple passports should have been screened further for being a possible threat thanks to the “red flag” of the passportS, but - they didn’t! It’s not TSA’s business to know, care, or do anything about anything not related to that airplane getting to its destination safely & on-time. TSA is not FBI, DEA, IRS, ATF, or any other TLA.


9 posted on 07/09/2009 1:23:42 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (John Galt was exiled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
Yay! BFT!
10 posted on 07/09/2009 1:24:56 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (John Galt was exiled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

Why, the Hussein Justice Dept has already redefined terrorism. A terrorist is anybody who didn’t vote for Hussein!


11 posted on 07/09/2009 1:31:55 PM PDT by Oldpuppymax (AGENDA OF THE LEFT EXPOSED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
if the TSA officer happens to see something unrelated to airport security while screening you, he is allowed to act on that.

NO. TSA is neither authorized nor trained to act on criminal matters pertaining to anything outside a strict formal definition of airport security. Law is far too complex for someone untrained in enforcement thereof to act contrary to one's rights based largely on outright ignorance.

In the case of the Ron Paul activist, there was NOTHING wrong with what he was doing. Travelling with $4700 is NOT ILLEGAL, and the TSA agents had absolutely no grounds for detaining & interrogating him. That they suspected wrongdoing was purely a matter of ignorance, not informed & authorized discretion.

That which legitimately may be suspect, but outside TSA's purview, may not be acted on precisely because if not for the coincidental search AND their deliberate action thereupon nobody would have known nuttin'. There are plenty of cases upholding the 4th Amendment when plain evidence of criminal wrongdoing was suppressed precisely because save for the vaguest suspicion of an unrelated issue the search would never have happened in the first place - and that's exactly what we have here: based solely on the totally lawful activity of taking a commercial flight, the search occurs and turns up something questionable that has absolutely nothing to do with the purpose of the search.

Unless TSA agents are suitably trained in matters which are the jurisiction of FBI, DEA, ATF, IRS, etc. then said agents have no business acting on ignorance-driven suspicions. (Commonly understood evidence of violent felonies may be acted on, but that's because ANYONE can reasonably & legally act on them.)

12 posted on 07/09/2009 1:37:16 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (John Galt was exiled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldpuppymax

A terrorist is now (has the bill passed yet? or still pending?) whomever BHO’s hand-picked Attorney General declares is one.


13 posted on 07/09/2009 1:38:23 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (John Galt was exiled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BGHater

Police officers are experts at bending rules, particularly in the “war on drugs.” As a police officer, I was taught to push the rules of the “Terry search,” which meant that if I articulated fear that a suspect might harm me, I could legally frisk suspects for weapons without probable cause. I know officers who towed cars, again legally, simply so they could “inventory” the contents (technically for safekeeping). In both cases, the real goal was to find illegal drugs and make an arrest.

One must expect law enforcement to use all its available tools. As a law enforcement officer, why deal with the tedious process of probable cause, judicial approval and paperwork?

In order to stop and search any suspect, not just a terrorism suspect, law enforcement need only wait for a person to enter an implied consent area such as a subway or a shopping mall. Their action justified by the “war on terror,” police may then conduct a full search. The true object of the search — most likely drug possession, but any contraband will do — is unrelated to terrorism.

Kudos to an honest cop!

parsy, who has met far too many of the other kind.


14 posted on 07/09/2009 1:41:10 PM PDT by parsifal ("Knock and ye shall receive!" (The Bible, somewhere.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
If law enforcement people discover evidence of criminality when doing something else, what is the legal status?

The legal status depends on whether the the legal issue is within their jurisdiction. A common cop is tasked with both issuing speeding tickets and arresting for drug possession - if he finds one while dealing with the other, it is indeed his problem to deal with. The same common cop is NOT tasked with, say, addressing tax fraud, so if he glimpses documents that he (in his legal ignorance) perceives as possible evidence thereof it is not his business to detain a driver and hand him bodily over to the IRS.

if TSA people discover evidence of other crime, what is their legal obligation?

On what grounds is the TSA agent authorized (and trained) to identify and act on such "crime"? Some issues may be plainly obvious to the public at large and thus acted on (say, finding someone's freshly-harvested ear in carry-on luggage), but anything not so obvious which the agent has not been trained to recognize & handle is not their business (say, possessing a cashbox is not grounds for detaining on an ill-understood law limiting how much cash can be travelled with, or what constitutes a passport one is not allowed to possess).

If they're not at least minimally trained & authorized to act on a perceived transgression, they are not to act thereon. That's the way the Constitution operates: governmental powers not granted do not exist.

15 posted on 07/09/2009 1:48:02 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (John Galt was exiled.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: BGHater
ACLU, hate it or not, has the audio recording from Steven Bierfeldt's interrogation and detention:

Bierfeldt v. Napolitano audio evidence

Perhaps the guy would have made his life easier by just answering the questions at the onset, but after recently seeing the "Never Talk to the Police" Youtube videos, I would probably do the same thing to protect myself. The only thing different I would do is not cave and answer at the end.

Waste of time? Maybe, but this is our only recourse in the police state we have come to live in.

I'll give the guy credit, and say I'm really glad this wasn't me.

16 posted on 07/09/2009 1:49:17 PM PDT by Rodamala
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

In your car, cops can make a safety sweep for weapons. Usually does not include trunk. They may ask for permission to search your car. IF DWI or DUI, they can impound your car and do an inventory search. They can seize stuff in plain view.

The problem is, that cops lie like dogs. They will search and then make up excuses for the search. They obtain search warrants the same way. They break the biggest and most important law in the land (the Constitution) to catch some druggie.

That is why “liberal” judges are really better. They tend to protect people against the gov’t. Its the word “liberal” that throws conservatives off. We just hate the “l” word even when it don’t mean what we think.

parsy, who is waiting for the Dirty Harry type movie that will make it ok for cops to seize guns and Bibles.


17 posted on 07/09/2009 1:52:52 PM PDT by parsifal ("Knock and ye shall receive!" (The Bible, somewhere.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise; Dilbert San Diego

You’re right. Just commenting on the absurdity of the world.


18 posted on 07/09/2009 1:54:13 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rodamala

Wow. Thanks for that link. It is full of gems.


19 posted on 07/09/2009 2:02:56 PM PDT by BGHater (Insanity is voting for Republicans and expecting Conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DManA

You’re so much of sh*t ist isn’t funny. You’re in the wrong country if you think the government has the right to make this a totalitarian police state.


20 posted on 07/09/2009 2:55:34 PM PDT by CodeToad (If it weren't for physics and law enforcement I'd be unstoppable!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson