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

Federal judge rules U.S. no-fly list violates Constitution

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 93 posts

Re: Federal judge rules U.S. no-fly list violates Constitution

#41

Post by [deleted] »

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #29
unreal37 wrote: post #7

This seems like the right decision to me. Being blocked from air travel is indeed a violation of liberty. I think the U.S. government has a right to keep a list of suspicious persons, watch and monitor them, block them from visiting the United States, but there should be a way to appeal your inclusion on that list especially if you are a U.S. legal resident or citizen. You can't just remain on that list forever, unab…

The funny thing is we just had this trial in 2010 and lost. I suspect 9/11 hysteria is dying down, so now we can have real adult conversations about things like this. Not to mention ending or deeply cutting the drug war. Or our constant talk of FISA, NSA, etc powers. I really think the conversation that would have been unthinkable in 2001-2005 is finally happening. Sadly, social progress happens one funeral and a tim…

[deleted]

Re: Federal judge rules U.S. no-fly list violates Constitution

#42

Post by IanDrake »

tobinfricke wrote: post #27
higherpurpose wrote: post #3

Now if only we'd get a similar ruling for no-warrant "border" searches, where border can mean tens of miles from the actual border.

Apparently it has been asserted that this special border region extends inward 100 miles from borders and coastlines . This swath includes around 2/3 of the US population. http://rt.com/usa/court-upholds-laptop-border-searches-041/ https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights-constitution-free-zone...

Youtube has got some great videos of people enforcing their rights at these stops.

Re: Federal judge rules U.S. no-fly list violates Constitution

#43

Post by the_watcher »

jevinskie wrote: post #10
unreal37 wrote: post #7

This seems like the right decision to me. Being blocked from air travel is indeed a violation of liberty. I think the U.S. government has a right to keep a list of suspicious persons, watch and monitor them, block them from visiting the United States, but there should be a way to appeal your inclusion on that list especially if you are a U.S. legal resident or citizen. You can't just remain on that list forever, unab…

Does this ruling imply some sort of "right to travel"?

The ruling does seem to imply that, however, on appeal, that will almost certainly be clarified. No judge would actually argue for a right to travel so broadly defined that it would essentially remove all regulatory power over who can and cannot fly. The ruling will likely be clarified for precedent to mean that the right to due process includes a right to quickly and effectively contest designations by government agencies in the absence of formal charges of violating a law.

The right to travel, in the broad sense of "you have the right to move wherever you want to move so long as no laws are violated," is likely covered by an umbrella of the 1st Amendment right to free speech and expression, as well as the 9th Amendment, as a negative right: you are free from being prevented from travel by means not permissible by law or Constitutionally.

Re: Federal judge rules U.S. no-fly list violates Constitution

#46

Post by aarkling »

pc86 wrote: post #24
motbob wrote: post #9

The ruling only applies to U.S. citizens. As mentioned in the article, the vast majority of people on the list are non-citizens. EDIT: Or perhaps it does apply to non-citizens when they are on U.S. soil. I'm not sure.

The Constitution applies to anyone within the US, citizen or not.

Yes in most cases it applies to all US residents. But many don't apply to non-residents who still live in the US. For Eg: international students.

Re: Federal judge rules U.S. no-fly list violates Constitution

#47

Post by revelation »

middleclick wrote: post #6

"The 13 plaintiffs - four of them veterans of the U.S. military - deny they have links to terrorism and say they only learned of their no-fly status when they arrived at an airport and were blocked from boarding a flight." This truly fits the definition of a Kafkaesque system -- you are put on a list and you are denied justice and never told what your crime is. Great work by the ACLU.

Well, in many cases there is no crime. Given the ridiculous amount of people on the list and the way the form is designed, a large number will be on there due to a "mistake" in filling out the form.

Theres an excerpt of the form here:

http://papersplease.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/vgtof-...

Notice how you have to check the box to indicate someone is not to be added to the list. It is completely counter-intuitive. I'd say it is just badly designed, but we're far beyond innocent mistakes here, at this point there needs to be judicial and personal responsibility for the people involved in its creation and ongoing maintenance.

Re: Federal judge rules U.S. no-fly list violates Constitution

#48

Post by afarrell »

Crito wrote: post #20
XorNot wrote: post #4

About time. There's no human being on Earth so dangerous they can't be safely put on an airplane.

I think your statement requires a slight modification: There's no human being on Earth who is not guilty of any crime that is so dangerous that they cannot be safely put on an airplane. By all means, keep the convicted Son of Sam's of this world off my airplane. But somebody that the state finds themselves unable to convict of anything ? Give me a break. Either the state can prove that they are dangerous and need to…

It is no crime to have a highly airborne-communicable disease, but it is dangerous to be on an airplane with one.

Re: Federal judge rules U.S. no-fly list violates Constitution

#49

Post by [deleted] »

adventured wrote: post #38
Nanzikambe wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hows about children? Seeing as they legally they can't accept any amount of responsibility - can we ban them too? I mean toddlers have to count as either high or insane and probably would try crash the plane if they weren't restrained. Plus imagine how peaceful flights would be ..

Children don't have to accept legal responsibility, parents do that for them in most instances. So your point is nullified.

[deleted]

Re: Federal judge rules U.S. no-fly list violates Constitution

#50

Post by saraid216 »

Aqueous wrote: post #25

I do not believe a judge currently has to authorize someone's placement on the No Fly List, which right away raises red flags. So the No Fly List is definitely unconstitutional as it is currently implemented, but I wonder if it would be replaced a constitutional implementation. For instance, if FBI, CIA, or NSA had to clear a probable cause legal hurdle in order to place someone on the list, and if a judge, rather th…

I'm pretty sure such a constitutional implementation already exists: namely, they can just revoke your passport, which I think has to go through due process.
Post reply on HN