No, that the Constitution has a fixed meaning that can be determined objectively. That is the virtual antithesis of the leftist position.
And if left to their own devices, what do you expect that airlines would do differently that would be detrimental to safety?
Nothing. Therefore there's no practical reason to change.
Good. Now that we're clear that requiring government to back off would not result in a decrease in safety, why get them involved? While there may not be a "practical" reason for making the change, there's an important constitutional reason. The difference between requiring that you be searched before being allowed to board a plane, and requiring that you be searched before being allowed to leave your house, is a difference of degree only, not of kind. Like Madison said, "It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens, and one of the noblest characteristics of the late revolution. The freemen of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle." Of course, that's just an 18th-century gentleman's way of saying "Nip it in the bud!"