But judges are neither the sole nor final arbiters of the law or the constitution, so I cannot agree that that is what the law is. It is merely a long-standing usurpation.
No, I agree - the people are the final arbiters of the law and the Constitution. However, that hardly gives you much cover, since the people seem quite content with the general trend of constitutional interpretations produced by the courts. But, if you persuade enough people of the rightness of your position, then it will be so. The best way to do that might be to discuss how the law should be, rather than trying to persuade people that your interpretion represents the law as it is...
"... I'm fully aware that there have been words written down by judges that support your view. But judges are neither the sole nor final arbiters of the law or the constitution, so I cannot agree that that is what the law is. It is merely a long-standing usurpation.To: Tauzero
The apathy of the people is not license to violate the Constitution. The Commerce Clause does not give Federal agents the power to conduct searches without reason.
The Commerce Clause does not give the Federal government the power to force airlines to put into each ticket an agreement to be searched at random.
A contract between an airline and a customer does not give Federal agents leave to ignore the Constitution, and conduct illegal searches without reason.
Even if the Supreme Court says it's okay, random searches of citizens is STILL illegal.