Skip to comments.
New law barring non-citizens as airport screeners found unconstitutional
AP ^
| 11/15/02
| Gary Gentile
Posted on 11/15/2002 8:45:44 PM PST by Rome2000
Nation: New law barring non-citizens as airport screeners found unconstitutional
|
Copyright © 2002 AP Online |
|
|
|
By GARY GENTILE, AP Business Writer
AP Photo/Lucian Read Mark Rosenbaum, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, talks with reporters after a federal judge temporarily blocked a rule saying the government's new airport security screeners must be U.S. citizens, outside the federal courthouse in downtown Los Angeles on Friday, Nov. 15, 2002.
|
LOS ANGELES (November 15, 2002 7:54 p.m. EST) - A federal judge on Friday temporarily blocked a rule saying the government's new airport security screeners must be U.S. citizens.
The portion of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act barring non-citizens from the positions is unconstitutional, U.S. District Judge Robert Takasugi ruled.
Takasugi's preliminary injunction will remain in place until trial in a civil rights lawsuit brought by nine plaintiffs at Los Angeles and San Francisco International Airports. No trial date has been set.
The ruling will affect as many as 8,000 airport screeners, most of whom already have lost their jobs, said Ben Wizner, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, which brought the case.
Plaintiffs lawyers said the ruling will apply to airports nationwide and will allow the non-citizen workers to reapply for jobs that became federal positions following the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
U.S. Justice Department lawyer Elizabeth Shapiro declined to comment on the ruling. She said it was not clear that the injunction would apply nationwide.
Mark Rosenbaum, executive director of the ACLU of Southern California, compared the government's attempt to fire non-citizens from screening jobs to the World War II internment of Japanese-Americans.
"You're classifying a group of non-citizens as inherently dangerous," he said.
A Nov. 19 deadline had been set for airports to remove all non-citizens from screening jobs. Rosenbaum noted that the ban did not apply to other airport workers.
"From the pilots to the cargo handlers to people who work in the gift shop, there's no citizenship requirement," he said.
Congress passed a law last November to federalize all airport screeners.
ACLU lawyers also said they hoped the judge's decision would convince Congress to pass an amendment before the Senate that would allow U.S. nationals to hold airport security screening jobs. One of the plaintiffs is from American Samoa, who had been barred from applying as a baggage screener.
|
TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-180 next last
To: tet68
This is exactly the reason why the rats and RINOS can never be allowed again to be in charge of who sits on the federal bench.
This idiot was interned with his family in WWII, is a Democrat, and was appointed by former President Ford.
Another professional victim with an axe to grind.
21
posted on
11/15/2002 9:03:25 PM PST
by
Rome2000
To: Rome2000
There is an upside to this story that most people have missed. Maybe this will be enough to get a Constitutional amendment passed, that will place severe limits on the Constitutional protections extended to non-citizens. That would take away the arguments that idiot liberal judges use to subvert the Constitution in favor of foreign nationals. There would still be a lot of other places that they would practice their judicial activism. But, at least one hole would be patched.
To: Lunatic Fringe
He was a LA County Judge too, probably Judge Ito's idol.
23
posted on
11/15/2002 9:06:33 PM PST
by
Rome2000
To: Rome2000
I guess security of this country does not belong in the hands of her citizens....but in the hands of legal and illegal aliens?
To: Rome2000
Nation: New law barring non-citizens as airport screeners found unconstitutional
Gee, the old law barring non-citizens or naturalized citizens from the presidency isn't unconstitutional.
25
posted on
11/15/2002 9:07:47 PM PST
by
aruanan
To: Rome2000
It won't be too much longer until
Article II Section 1 Clause 5 of the United States Constitution will be found to be unconstitutional:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
-PJ
To: Rome2000
Somehow I am not surprised ..
27
posted on
11/15/2002 9:16:58 PM PST
by
Mo1
To: Political Junkie Too
FBI Special Agent Qualification Requirements:Entry Requirements:
To carry out its mission, the FBI needs men and women who can fill a variety of demanding positions. To qualify as an FBI Special Agent, you must be a U.S. citizen, or a citizen of the Northern Mariana Islands, at least 23 and not have reached your 37th birthday on appointment.
Of course now, they'll have to add an addendum that says "Jihadists May Apply" according to Judge T, President Ford's gift to America.
28
posted on
11/15/2002 9:17:43 PM PST
by
jwalsh07
To: Rome2000
>One of the plaintiffs is from American Samoa, who had been barred from applying as a baggage screener.
???Does that not make him an American citizen the same as if he came from Puerto Rico?
To: P8riot
How long are the American people gonna put up with this bu!!$#*^ ? Problem is .. a lot of the americans are not aware of what is going on in the courts
30
posted on
11/15/2002 9:20:10 PM PST
by
Mo1
To: jwalsh07
Whats so special about the Northern Mariana Islands?
To: Rome2000
"You're classifying a group of non-citizens as inherently dangerous."Unqualified as a descriptor works for me.
To: Dialup Llama
The NMI are a US Commonwealth.
33
posted on
11/15/2002 9:23:26 PM PST
by
jwalsh07
Comment #34 Removed by Moderator
To: jwalsh07
LOS ANGELES - A federal judge has dismissed the Justice Department's case against seven people accused of funneling charitable donations to an Iranian military group deemed partly responsible for the 1979 takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and still labeled a terrorist threat. ????? ... What the heck
35
posted on
11/15/2002 9:25:32 PM PST
by
Mo1
To: Rome2000
Well thank you ACLU. Really, they couldn't have done us more of a favor:
- Find a liberal idiot judge with an agenda willing to ignore the Constitution and write a hasty opinion,
- Send it to the Ninth Jerkit for another hasty and poorly conceived opinion,
- Then it goes to a conservative SCOTUS presented by an able solicitor for an angry president.
Maybe Bush will get it about border control?
Naahh.
To: Rome2000
""You're classifying a group of non-citizens as inherently dangerous," he said." So?
37
posted on
11/15/2002 9:27:25 PM PST
by
mlo
To: Carry_Okie
Maybe Bush will get it about border control? Get what?
38
posted on
11/15/2002 9:28:30 PM PST
by
mlo
To: Dialup Llama
>One of the plaintiffs is from American Samoa, who had been barred from applying as a baggage screener.
???Does that not make him an American citizen the same as if he came from Puerto Rico?
No, that makes him Hunter S. Thompson's attorney.
39
posted on
11/15/2002 9:29:32 PM PST
by
tet68
To: Rome2000
This'll be overturned in a heartbeat.
40
posted on
11/15/2002 9:31:22 PM PST
by
lepton
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-180 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson