The nude scans and genital gropes are NOT administrative searches. I’m a passenger, not the airline owner. Searching me is not the same thing as doing an inspection, aka administrative search, of a commercial enterprise to ensure regulatory compliance. In other words, the government can search the airport to ensure it has such things as fire extinguishers, restrooms, entry/exit controls, etc. An administrative search is conducted with the intent to ensure regulatory compliance, not uncover criminal activity, i.e. locate terrorists. This doesn’t prevent the state from prosecuting crimes discovered in the course of the inspection. You’re really stretching if you think New York v. Burger permits the federal government to strip everyone down without probable cause or a warrant in the course of inspections to determine airline regulatory compliance.
I'm merely stating a legal fact. The law says that airport screenings are administrative searches. In any case, I already said that I am not in favor of the TSA model, I believe in the El Al model, which is quite a bit more effective, and has a proven track record.
I’m a passenger, not the airline owner.
And you don't have a Constitutional right to be a passenger on any airline. You don't own the airplane. The airline does. So if you choose to use their property, you have to abide by the rules set forth to use that property, right?
Searching me is not the same thing as doing an inspection, aka administrative search, of a commercial enterprise to ensure regulatory compliance. In other words, the government can search the airport to ensure it has such things as fire extinguishers, restrooms, entry/exit controls, etc. An administrative search is conducted with the intent to ensure regulatory compliance, not uncover criminal activity, i.e. locate terrorists. This doesn’t prevent the state from prosecuting crimes discovered in the course of the inspection. You’re really stretching if you think New York v. Burger permits the federal government to strip everyone down without probable cause or a warrant in the course of inspections to determine airline regulatory compliance.
I'm not stretching anything. The Courts have classified airport screenings as administrative searches. That's a legal fact. I personally think a better case could be made for implied consent. Since there is no Constitutional right to fly, you must agree to abide by the regulations set forth by Congress (which has the right to set forth such regulations under the commerce clause) or the airline (which owns the airplane) when you choose flying as your method of travel. If you don't like the regulations, then you are free to either purchase your own airplane on which you can fly in any manner that you choose, OR utilize another travel method.
Think of it this way, if I wanted to ride in your car, and you decided to let me do so, I would be forced to abide by your rules when I choose to ride with you. That would include a search of my person and belongings. If I was not willing to abide by this, then I could exercise my right not to enter your vehicle.
People seem to want a Socialist solution to this problem. That being the discovery of some unenumerated "right" to fly, and then government procedures that support their notion of what the world should look like, even if those procedures would be ineffective.
I'm sorry, that's simply not Constitutional limited government. True Constitutional limited government would respect the private property rights of the airplane owners, and would recognize that the Constitution gives the specific enumerated authority to Congress to regulate Interstate Commerce. Interstate air travel is clearly interstate commerce according to the intent of the Founders. So Congress has a right to act here. This is in stark contrast to the areas in which Congress has NO RIGHT to act, but does so by stretching the meaning of what Constitutes Commerce, for example, Regulating guns, mandating health insurance, setting wage and hour laws, mandating fuel standards, bailing out banks, and most other federal law in existence is NOT the regulation of commerce within the meaning of the clause or the intent of the founders, and Congress has NO BUSINESS in these areas.