RunRyder RC
WATCH
 1 page 964 views POST REPLY
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › How The TSA Legally Circumvents The Fourth Amendment
04-22-2011 07:27 PM  7 years agoPost 1
PsychoZ

rrApprentice

Northern, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Here is somethign that I did not know and always wondered about.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Copied from: http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyin...urth-amendment/

A constant complaint from those opposed to the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) new ‘enhanced’ pat down searches is that these pat downs violate a traveler’s Fourth Amendment rights.

For those unfamiliar with the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution it reads “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

While the new TSA enhanced pat downs may violate the Fourth Amendment on the surface, what most people are not aware of is that the 9th Circuit Court of the United States ruled on the search of passengers in airports back in 1973, which effectively suspends limited aspects of the Fourth Amendment while undergoing airport security screening.

In 1973 the 9th Circuit Court rules on U.S. vs Davis, 482 F.2d 893, 908, there are key pieces of wording that give the TSA its power to search essentially any way they choose to. The key wording in this ruling includes “noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft.”

U.S. vs Davis goes onto to state “[an administrative search is allowed if] no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose, and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.”

U.S. vs Davis was upheld by the 9th Circuit Court in 1986 in U.S. vs Pulido-Baquerizo, 800 F.2d 899, 901 with this ruling “To judge reasonableness, it is necessary to balance the right to be free of intrusion with society’s interest in safe air travel.”

These 9th Circuit Court ruling laid the path for the creation of Public Law 107-71, the Aviation Transportation and Security Act, which was virtually unopposed by legislators when it was it was signed into law on the 19th of November 2001 by President George W. Bush. This law laid the groundwork for the Transportation Security Administration and the evolution of its current security procedures.

These laws give the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Transportation Security Administration significant legal latitude to perform the searches utilizing their current procedures without fear of violating the Fourth Amendment. Any attempt to oppose TSA searches citing the Fourth Amendment would be rebuffed unless done through the proper legal channels.

In order to create an effective change of the TSA’s policies, those who oppose current procedures should organize and file a legal action seeking to overturn or alter the U.S. vs David ruling by the 9th Circuit Court.

Presently the TSA has what appears to be a “blank check” in writing out what is “no more intrusive or intensive than necessary” and what is “confined in good faith to that purpose.” With the latitude the agency has been granted … not only does a legal precedent need to be set that challenges U.S. vs Davis, but further oversight of the TSA needs to be created by the House & Senate committees responsible for overseeing and funding the agency.

A change needs to be made, a ground swell including both citizens and legislators must move in a single movement … but all of that is irrelevant without basing an argument on facts, opinions of qualified experts and an understanding of the laws that make this all possible.

Misinformed yelling does nothing to help bring about the change that is necessary.

Happy Flying!

Tea Parties are for little girls with imaginary friends

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-22-2011 08:00 PM  7 years agoPost 2
InvertedDude

rrVeteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

..
..

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-22-2011 08:03 PM  7 years agoPost 3
SSN Pru

rrElite Veteran

Taxachusetts

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Explain to me how a judges ruling can completely go against what is clearly in the Constitution?

Stupidity can be cured. Ignorance is for life!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-22-2011 08:06 PM  7 years agoPost 4
Dennis (RIP)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Explain to me how a judges ruling can completely go against what is clearly in the Constitution?
I could be wrong. But, thats probably because no one challenged that law to the point where it reached the supreme court.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-22-2011 08:08 PM  7 years agoPost 5
SSN Pru

rrElite Veteran

Taxachusetts

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

You aren't wrong, Dennis. Or, perhaps the Supreme Court chose to not hear the case.

Stupidity can be cured. Ignorance is for life!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-22-2011 09:58 PM  7 years agoPost 6
PsychoZ

rrApprentice

Northern, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I made a choice no more flying for me.
Seriously, you will never fly again? I just flew to Phoenix and never got patted down or frisked. I only had to go through the metal detector. What happens if you need to go to another country or Hawaii, that is a long boat ride.

Tea Parties are for little girls with imaginary friends

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-22-2011 10:00 PM  7 years agoPost 7
PsychoZ

rrApprentice

Northern, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

These 9th Circuit Court ruling laid the path for the creation of Public Law 107-71, the Aviation Transportation and Security Act, which was virtually unopposed by legislators when it was it was signed into law on the 19th of November 2001 by President George W. Bush. This law laid the groundwork for the Transportation Security Administration and the evolution of its current security procedures.
I remember not to long ago that alot of people were blaming Obama for the TSA and what they are doing now. Amazing how easily people forget the past and prefer to blame alot of stuff going on now on the present leadership.

Tea Parties are for little girls with imaginary friends

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-23-2011 12:20 AM  7 years agoPost 8
InvertedDude

rrVeteran

USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

..
..

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-23-2011 03:23 AM  7 years agoPost 9
baby uh1

rrVeteran

St. James, Mo.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I think that the key here is that flying is optional. If you don't want to be searched, don't fly. Your choice.
Now the physical searching of under age children should be prosecuted as child abuse or worse!

Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-23-2011 04:44 AM  7 years agoPost 10
drdot

rrElite Veteran

So. California, Orange County.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

fwiw..

I have to fly to keep my job....There is no doubt in my mind that my rights are violated...I have precious little choice unless I want to become unemployed for the sake of making a point...In a very few more years, it won't matter....So perhaps I'll get to be a TV star yet!....
Big issue to me is where do our rights end?...The Constitution doesn't seem to use words like "But", "Unless", "Except"...You get the idea...
Our nation collectively seems to be drifting into the same mindset as Erwin Chemerinsky, the legal tool who sued Caterpillar because an Israeli soldier ran over a peace protester with a D-8....Seems Caterpillar should have known better than to sell one to the evil Jews...
Honestly...that kind of thinking is so intellectually dishonest that it beggars belief....But good 'ole Erwin is the Dean of the law school at UC Irvine...
As long as we drift toward being "Sheeple", we risk losing our identity as a sovereign nation...I wish the next few generations luck.

BC

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
04-25-2011 03:37 PM  7 years agoPost 11
PsychoZ

rrApprentice

Northern, CA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Are you saying they have stopped the naked body scanner and the actual frisking touching your body?
I only had to go through a metal detector in Phoenix and Sacramento, I have yet to see the xray machine or anyone get patted down. It seems it is happening only where I have yet to fly, but I will go through the xray, I am not worried.

Tea Parties are for little girls with imaginary friends

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 1 page 964 views POST REPLY
HomeOff Topics News & Politics › How The TSA Legally Circumvents The Fourth Amendment
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 1  Topic Subscribe

Tuesday, September 25 - 11:41 pm - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

The RC discussion world needs to consolidate. RR is now one choice for that. Its software is cutting edge. It hosts on-topic advertising. Help RR increase traffic buy making suggestions, posting in RR's new areas (sites) and by spreading the word.

The RunRyder Difference

• Category system to allow Rep/Vendor postings.
• Classifieds with sold (hidden) category.
• Classifieds with separate view new.
• Answer PMs offsite via email reply.
• Member gallery photos with advanced scripting.
• Gallery photo viewer integrated into postings.
• Highly refined search with advanced back end.
• Hosts its own high end fast response servers.
• Hosts thousands of HD event coverage videos.
• Rewrote entire code base with latest technology.
• No off-topic (annoying) click bait advertising.
Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online