Replies

And, of course, the 9th Circuit in United States vs. Aukai has held that you can't revoke consent to further searches, including a pat-down, once you've gone through the metal detector.

This is complete BS, but I shouldn't be surprised at this decision from the 9th Circus.

But, I believe that means that this precedent is only binding in the states in the 9th Circuit (i.e. CA, OR, WA, ID, MT, NV, AZ, AK, and HI). Unless there is a similar precedent in your circuit court, it's not necessarily valid.

Maybe I'll get the chance to set an opposite precedent in the 5th circuit. Those judges won't put up with this kind of crap, and it will set up a conflict that has to be decided by the Supreme Court.

This is complete BS, but I shouldn't be surprised at this decision from the 9th Circus.

Oh wow. I just read US v. Aukai. The 9th circuit really screwed up.

The case was about whether contraband found during the search was admissible in court. The guy tried to take a meth pipe through security.

But, the 9th circuit ignored their own precedent: US v. Davis (airport screening searches are “valid only if they recognize the right of a person to avoid search by electing not to board the aircraft”) and US v. Homburg (“a party may revoke his consent to be searched any time prior to boarding the plane, even when he has passed beyond the initial screening point, if he agrees to leave the boarding area”).

They reversed on the basis of US v. Biswell, in which the Supreme Court upheld the warrantless search of a pawn shop's gun storeroom. The Court said that 18 USC 923(g) authorized the search -- and it does. You basically agree to that if you have an FFL.

But, here's where the 9th circuit screwed up. They claimed that airport screening searches are mandated by 49 USC 44901, and therefore that makes them compulsory.

Here's what 49 USC 44901 actually says:

(a) In General.— The Under Secretary of Transportation for Security shall provide for the screening of all passengers and property, including United States mail, cargo, carry-on and checked baggage, and other articles, that will be carried aboard a passenger aircraft operated by an air carrier or foreign air carrier in air transportation or intrastate air transportation.

Emphasis is mine. And that's the operative phrase: passengers that will be carried, not may be carried. The moment you decline to take the flight, this federal law no longer applies. They have no grounds to search you.