Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 140 posts

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#91

Post by syshum »

DannyBee wrote: post #50
rayiner wrote: post #4

The opinion is here (should be up on the CA3 website later today): http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=310762278918844... . The relevant discussion starts at 12-13. The gist of the suit is this: Ordinarily, you cannot sue the federal government (sovereign immunity). The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), broadly waives sovereign immunity for tort claims. An exception to that waiver of immunity is where the agen…

(i'll say i actually gravely dislike the TSA, but think this is clearly the right result) "The majority holding is probably correct as a matter of statutory interpretation." Yeah, agreed. Reading this statute, it's fairly clear it was not meant to apply here, but it does raise the sad issue of "we've separated these jobs enough to create a loophole". If they were designated LEOs, they'd clearly fall under the statute…

Not making them LEO's is one of the ways they get around the 4th amendment, if they LEO with the ability to criminally charge people well now you are making a Criminal Search and the 4th amendment kicks in.

Law enforcement is not allowed to search people in a free nation unless there is probable cause a crime has been committed.

personally I think the TSA is a 4th amendment violation as they stand but....

>As long as air travel remains not a fundamental right

Freedom of movement is a fundamental Right. Airport security was fine when it was a non-governmental process imposed as a condition of carriage by the private airline companies. It becomes a problem when it is government agents doing to searching.

One should not be subjected to searches by government agents as a condition of being allowed to travel

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#92

Post by syshum »

DannyBee wrote: post #51
kevin_b_er wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So who's responsible for abuse by the TSA now or is the TSA and its officers totally immune from illegal acts?

The TSA has an administrative process for filing claims (like most agencies). They went through that and it was denied. There is no claim in that lawsuit that the process was not fair or reasonable.

We investigated ourselves and found we did nothing wrong....

Classic

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#93

Post by syshum »

s73v3r_ wrote: post #56

"“For most people, TSA screenings are an unavoidable feature of flying,” but it is “squarely in the realm” of Congress to expand liability for abuses, Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause wrote." How on earth is the TSA not already covered under those laws? This is why I can't get behind "originalist" judges; they interpret the laws and the Constitution too literally. Because the TSA wasn't explicitly named under the act…

An orginalist would rule the TSA unconstitutional on several fronts... not the least of which 4th Amendment, 10th Amendment, Article I Section 8, etc.

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#94

Post by compiler-guy »

return_True wrote: post #17

If they are not LEO, then they do not have the power to detain people, do they? That means effectively the false imprisonment is actually kidnapping?

TSA agents don't detain you. They call police who do. The response time is in seconds.

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#95

Post by r00fus »

compiler-guy wrote: post #94
return_True wrote: post #17

If they are not LEO, then they do not have the power to detain people, do they? That means effectively the false imprisonment is actually kidnapping?

TSA agents don't detain you. They call police who do. The response time is in seconds.

Smells like a loophole. Doesn't that violate the spirit of the law?

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#96

Post by cmiles74 »

DannyBee wrote: post #50
rayiner wrote: post #4

The opinion is here (should be up on the CA3 website later today): http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=310762278918844... . The relevant discussion starts at 12-13. The gist of the suit is this: Ordinarily, you cannot sue the federal government (sovereign immunity). The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), broadly waives sovereign immunity for tort claims. An exception to that waiver of immunity is where the agen…

(i'll say i actually gravely dislike the TSA, but think this is clearly the right result) "The majority holding is probably correct as a matter of statutory interpretation." Yeah, agreed. Reading this statute, it's fairly clear it was not meant to apply here, but it does raise the sad issue of "we've separated these jobs enough to create a loophole". If they were designated LEOs, they'd clearly fall under the statute…

I wonder if an "administrative complaint" is somehow different from the TSA grievance process. The number of grievances appears to be rising and is far more than 200, in the first three quarters of 2017 they had 6,700 grievances filed.[0]

There are reasons to suspect that the TSA isn't adequately following up on these grievances. I can't find any new data, but in 2013 the Government Account Office (GAO) complained that the TSA didn't really have a process in place.[1]

"TSA does not have a process for conducting reviews of misconduct cases to verify that TSA staff at airports are complying with policies and procedures for adjudicating employee misconduct."

[0]: https://www.travelersunited.org/tsaairline-security/tsa-comp...

[1]: https://consumerist.com/2013/07/30/tsa-misconduct-cases-on-t...

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#97

Post by jackhack »

rayiner wrote: post #26
bilbo0s wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"...can you assault one without some sort of trumped up federal charge?..." ??? Genuinely curious here, if a person assaults someone who works for the federal government, (or even the local government for that matter), and they charge him/her for that assault... is that charge really "trumped up"? I thought that there were actually laws against that? Isn't "trumped up" when you DON'T actually assault the federal or l…

Assault/battery are state law crimes or civil torts. But 18 USC 111 makes it a federal crime to assault any federal employee (not just law enforcement officers) in the performance of her duties. Presumably, OP is referring to the idea that having special laws to make assault a federal, rather than state, crime is "trumped up."

For the record, citizens have been arrested and tried for assault on a federal employee for passing gas in the presence of TSA, and for having an erection during a pat-down/groping after refusing the millimeter-wave body scan. (of course no weapons or contraband were present.)

Yes, you read that correctly -- a felony charge. it's as absurd as it sounds.

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#98

Post by dang »

mindslight wrote: post #2

The best interaction I ever had with the TSA was when I came upon a pair openly wearing their uniforms around a grocery store, so I was able to call them fascist child molesters to their faces.

Please don't post flamebait to HN. It leads to off-topic flamewars.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#99

Post by lmilcin »

That's it. I'm never gonna come to United States.

I no longer see United States as free, democratic and safe country to visit. United States usurps itself power to do whatever they want with me upon its soil. My electronic devices searched through, my social accounts surrendered, my belongings damaged or stolen on a whim of TSA without right to appeal or get reimbursed, I can be detained for however long U.S. wants without any judicial procedure.

Working in IT for large companies, I have been asked to come to US on few occasions but fortunately I have always been able to avoid this. Now I am going to straight decline based on the fact that I don't feel safe coming there.

Re: TSA screeners win immunity from flier abuse claims: U.S. appeals court

#100

Post by setr »

r00fus wrote: post #95
compiler-guy wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TSA agents don't detain you. They call police who do. The response time is in seconds.

Smells like a loophole. Doesn't that violate the spirit of the law?

Only if you assume that the relevant police are operating blindly at the request of the TSA officer. If they're doing their jobs... then they should themselves be checking that this event does in fact call for detainment.

It would be the same with mall security calling an actual police officer. Or you calling 911 on someone else. The officer should still be operating with autonomy, and can turn down your request to detain when its unnecessary or unreasonable (though I would imagine these psuedo-authorities are provided benefit of the doubt)

Post reply on HN