(no subject)

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Man With 4th Amendment Written on Chest Sues Over Airport Arrest

A 21-year-old Virginia man who wrote an abbreviated version of the Fourth Amendment on his body and stripped to his shorts at an airport security screening area is demanding $250,000 in damages for being detained on a disorderly conduct charge.

My opinion is that more people should do this. I have to make a business trip next week, and I may just do this, since my wife won't be there to stop me. :)

There should be more people protesting the TSA and the violation of our 4th Amendment rights that they perform every day. As long as people keep quiet and keep flying, nothing will change.

US travel group urges overhaul to aviation screening

You may have seen this article too. Unfortunately, it doesn't actually suggest anything good, like changing the security procedures to increase real security while reducing our rights violations. Instead, they recommend creating a security hole by treating some people as special trusted people. They should tattoo "gov't stooge" on their forehead too, that would make it easier to get them in the right line.

Comments

[box-in-the-box.livejournal.com]

My favorite part is that they grilled him about his possible connections to anti-American terrorist organizations for wearing part of the Constitution on his body.

Hating the TSA is something that citizens of ALL political affiliations can get behind. Between this, the illegal saving of thousands of nude X-ray images of passengers (including children) and "pat-downs" that legally qualify as sexual assaults in several cases, the entire agency needs to be dismantled.

[kawaiimamimi.livejournal.com]

I agree that protests like this should happen more. The practices of the TSA are disgusting.

However, you should at least do a spell check before hand. He wrote the 4 backwards, fer Christ sake.

[kawaiimamimi.livejournal.com]

That was a collective you, as in the people who might protest.

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

"before hand"

Sometimes, spellcheck isn't enough.

[kawaiimamimi.livejournal.com]

Oh man, you sure got me. Don't you feel oh so smart and smarmy now?

(http://s727.photobucket.com/albums/ww280/ichtragebrille/?action=view&current=trollface.jpg)

If only I was writing this lj comment on my body to make a protest about a violation of the Constitution, then it might actually matter.

[mrsilence.livejournal.com]

Putting *that* on your body to protest a violation of the Constitution would certainly give them pause...

[notmrgarrison.livejournal.com]

I'm guessing you did with the 4.
Christ.

[box-in-the-box.livejournal.com]

I would have actually awarded extra points if he'd intentionally misspelled one or two words and then drew squiggly red lines underneath the misspellings on his own chest.

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

That's so nerd.

[ccr1138.livejournal.com]

Understandable, as he was probably writing it on himself using a mirror.

[reflaxion.livejournal.com]

The guy took the time to write the Fourth Amendment on his chest - I would bet dollars to doughnuts that he was probably also acting like a dick, and that's why he was actually detained. Unfortunately, it seems we're not likely to find out.

[keithus.livejournal.com]

I agree with his message but you can't just throw a protest anywhere you want and not expect consequences. Especially in an airport.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

not expect consequences

Actually I think that this was all part of the plan.

[nevermind6794.livejournal.com]

http://www.crunchgear.com/2010/11/24/4th-amendment-wear-so-the-tsa-has-something-to-read-while-groping-you/

[mikeyxw.livejournal.com]

Nice thought, but I bet their effectiveness wears off the second time someone sees them.

[paedraggaidin.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I'm flying two weeks from today, first time in three years, and I am not enthusiastic about going through security. I won't repeat my reasons unless someone really wants to hear a libertarian/civil liberties whackjob tirade. This guy is my new hero.

Now I just need a shirt with that "gets paid to touch your junk" venn diagram on it....

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Do you have any options for airports without backscatters?

[paedraggaidin.livejournal.com]

It all depends on which flight the school gets, since they're paying....

[anfalicious.livejournal.com]

Have you seen those T-Shirts printed so they come up with it on the backscatter?

[737-700.livejournal.com]

Does the 4th even apply to airport screenings?

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

According to relevant precedent, no. The Fourth Amendment does not apply to what are called "administrative searches," which occur when a search is used to enforce compliance or ensure safety as part of a regulatory system. That's exactly what's going on with the TSA.

[farchivist.livejournal.com]

That's a neat legal trick.

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

Yeah, not one I really agree with. IMO the exclusionary remedy is wholly insufficient (it's really about a deterrent to law enforcement, not a remedy for the person whose rights are violated - IMO it's not even a remedy at all). The administrative search theory blocks monetary damages under 42 U.S.C. s. 1983 (though qualified immunity would probably block remedies there, at least for the time being), and the only other remedy for 4th Amendment violations (return of illegally seized property under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure) don't apply either.

It's a mess.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's crap. It needs to be fought and fixed. I agree that it's not a remedy at all.

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

Oh, and it's worth noting that the fruits of administrative searches are inadmissible in criminal proceedings. This is one of the ways they get around the 4th Amendment issue - the most common remedy for a 4A violation is exclusion, and they simply say that this applies presumptively to the fruits of admin search.

[harry-beast.livejournal.com]

Boycotting air travel would be a highly effective way to protest airport security. Having people write constitutional amendments on their bodies and strip in airports is less persuasive and less dignified.

[a-new-machine.livejournal.com]

Of course, this doesn't actually hurt airport security at all. The best way to hurt the TSA is to make them look awful. Your idea makes their job easier, and validates their claim that these searches are voluntary because you can always take a train/bus/chartered flight.

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

It makes flying to the USA prohibitive. I mean if there are other destinations, the security weighs in.

Hhhmmmmm.... Hawaii or Cuba? Well, with Cuba at least I don't have to deal with American customs.

Must note that this only affects public travel. They treat the rich different. We flew to SanFran on private jet and the customs guy barely looked at our passports. I coulda had a pound of coke and a few bombs. Private plane is the way to fly.

I've had ham sandwiches taken away by the US customs agents driving into Montana. There goes my lunch!

[singlethink.livejournal.com]

How does the TSA violate the 4th amendment? Why is anything they do unreasonable?

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

It depends on wether you consider air travel probable cause for a search.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I think it's a little different in that its the price you pay to travel. Its like a contract. You want to board plane, you submit to search. You're not required to be searched by law, and they're not required to let you board the plane by law. You agree to let them search you and they agree to let you board the plane.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

Like I said, "It Depends".

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Well probable cause has nothing to do with it, because that implies that the search is part of an investigation and its not, its part of a contract.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

True but if the screening finds anything (weapons, drugs, etc.) they aren't going to just deny you entrance. They're going to detain you that is when the legal ground gets shaky.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I don't see why?

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

What is the cause for arrest?

What do they have that is admissable in court?

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

No, it's Federal [unconstitutional] law, not a contract issue.
U.S. Code Title 49.VII.A.iii.449 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode49/usc_sec_49_00044901----000-.html)

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

It is treated as the obligation to fly. You are not required to fly. The things you listed are the requirements of the airports and airlines, not of the individuals.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Yes, the airport is required to screen you. You do not have the option to contract to fly without being screened, due to federal law. It is federal employees doing the search. Federal employees are violating the constitutional right to be free from unreasonable search. The federal law requiring them to do so is thus unconstitutional.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

You aren't required to fly.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

You don't have a right to say your piece on tv specifically, yet the government can't restrict your speech there. It's the same issue. Just because you are forced to "consent" doesn't make it not a violation of your rights.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

search of an individual or his/her premises (including an automobile) and/or seizure of evidence found in such a search by a law enforcement officer without a search warrant and without "probable cause" to believe evidence of a crime is present.
From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/unreasonable+search+and+seizure

Let's see, no warrant, no law enforcement officer, no probable cause. How is it reasonable?

[dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com]

I have no problem with searches as long as they tell me specifically what they're going to do. Penn Jillette made a really great point about this - http://www.pennandteller.com/03/coolstuff/penniphile/roadpennfederalvip.html