Slashdot Mirror
DOJ Could Ban Texas Flights Over Anti-Patdown Law
hellkyng writes "The Department of Justice may ban flights from Texas because of the Anti-Patdown law making its way through the legal system. Says Rep. David Simpson, 'Someone must make a stand against the atrocities of our government agents.' Should be interesting to see if Texas can pave the way for grope-free flying fun."
As of earlier today, the law's main sponsor, Dan Patrick, R-Houston, said the law is dead after support for the law collapsed.
http://www.click2houston.com/news/28032459/detail.html
My postings are informational and does not constitute legal advice. Act on it at your risk.
Yay, Texas.
When someone says, "Any fool can see
Have to wonder since most airports are local/state owned entities, could the TSA legally pull it's shenanigans on flights that originate and terminate within Texas? /yes, of course they will //but isn't the crux of the DOJ's argument around Interstate Commerce?
Flamebait
Serious inquiries only.
One more reason to fly Southwest.
agreed! Both of you
Also, the chocolate ration will be raised to twenty grammes a week.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
I thought I was going to have to resort to dating to be the recipient of some third-base action.
http://slashdot.org/submission/1608788/TSA-Threatens-To-Cancel-All-Flights-Out-Of-Texas
"The Department of Justice has sent a letter to Texas legislative leaders warning that the rule would run counter to federal laws."
What ever happened to the 4th amendment? Isn't that federal law?
Sad thing is, I'd rather have a patdown over increased chances of cancer.
Something's going on in the background here... it's unlikely these legislators are taking such a myopic view. Say the TSA tries to ban flights to Texas... really? Would anyone stand for this? Even a Californian would stand up for Texas if that were to happen. Even an Oregonian... hell, maybe even someone from Delaware.
This bill sounds like something John Wayne would support, which means it should be gravy to pass through the Texas house.
That would be interesting as the primary defense against hijacking is a locked door, not a pat down.
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
"Instead of threatening to shut down flights in Texas, why doesn't the TSA just show us their statutory authority to grope or ogle our private parts?" asked Simpson.
But aside from that, and perhaps it's my unfamiliarity with the proposal, I don't see any indication that this is trying to end the practice of treating everyone like a criminal.
Texas caved almost immediately. The next time some Texan starts bragging about what badasses they are down there, I'm going to bring this up. The TSA wrote one threatening letter and they peed their collective pants and groveled.
Proverbs 21:19
...because nothing say fuck you like introducing a bill that was never intended to be signed into law. Legislators from everywhere at all levels of government routinely introduce bills intended more as a statement than as an action.
Bah. We already had one guy do that last year in Austin. We don't need to be giving the crazies any more ideas than they already have.
I'm no fan of backscatter X-Ray machines, but "rape-scans"? Come on.
I read the internet for the articles.
The TSA/FAA could easily bar all takeoffs of scheduled flights that had enough fuel to get to the Texas border.
If they tried to shut down flights between Houston, Austin, and San Antonio or not-much-reserve-fuel flights between those cities and DFW the courts may toss them out.
In any case, the very real possibility that the feds would say "okay, no pat-downs, fine, no scheduled airline flights in and out of Texas" made this bill nothing more than a political "stand up for your principles" bill.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
But if the TSA doesn't grope my junk, who will?
Forever Alone...
Price, Quality, Time. Pick none. What, you thought you had a choice?
So can someone translate "homeland security police" into German for me?
The company's called rapiscan. I use the pun all the time when flying, guess it doesn't come across well in text.
Don't think of them as rape-scans. Think of them as Rap e-scans. E-scans for the up and coming rap star.
I've already suggest to my local representative that she introduce similar legislation in Indiana..... here's what I wrote:
I ask that you consider introducing legislation similar to that of the recently pulled HB 1937 of the State of Texas.
Here's the link to their web site about the bill: http://www.legis.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=82R&Bill=HB1937
It would criminalize the types of searches the TSA has been doing, which are in violation of the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution.
In introducing this, you would show that you stand for the rights of your fellow Hoosiers. We don't have as much air traffic to worry about, so their is less fallout. You would also show some distance between yourself and the DC beltway crowd, which will probably come in handy soon, as they keep debasing the dollar, leaving the States out to dry.
Thanks for your time and attention.
Normally I am not a huge fan of Texas because, in Texas, you are guilty until proven innocent. However, I am glad to see them standing up to the Federal government's blatant violation the 4th Amendment protection from unreasonable search. The pat downs done by TSA does violate the fourth amendment because anyone can be subject to it. A police officer must have reasonably articulated suspicion or fear of personal harm before he or she can conduct a frisk.
How do you jive "never intended to be signed into law" with the fact that it passed the Texas house -already- and, when the US attorney general of Texas said "you can't pass a state law that violates federal law" They basically said "really? watch us do it." It wasn't until the TSA basically strongarmed/blackmailed the state legislature when they brought out it's "Pass it and we'll ground every flight into and out of Texas, see how well your citizens like you then" that -some- of the senators backed down. Unfortunately, it was enough that the law would have failed so it was withdrawn.
Having a bill withdrawn is politically much more expedient than having it fail.
Despite their huffing and puffing it is not economically feasible or wise to shut down Texas air traffic. Houston is a major hub for several shipping companies and there are other large companies based in Texas. If they were to prevent air travel that would undermine the economic recovery they Feds have been chasing. Maybe not a lot, but a simple act like that would have rippling impacts and cost this country millions if not billions of dollars.
Texas should play their game and call their bluff.
... that there is a lot of intra-state airplane traffic - that's how Southwest got their start.
Does TSA have any authority over air traffic that doesn't cross state boundaries?
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
So what, does that mean they admit they are groping? Must be if they have to fight for the right.
And then either shut down US air traffic altogether. Or figure out less intrusive methods of providing security.
Have gnu, will travel.
So what are they going to do, fly into Texas then load the plane up on a flat bed trailer and drive it over the border?
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
So can the DoJ demonstrate how the gropedown ensures the safety of passengers and crew ? Try starting with how many ''terrorists'' have been caught. If they cannot then what Texas is doing won't affect safety. I can see that it will affect the job security of TSA employees, but that seems about it -- the money would be better spent elsewhere, eg: on healthcare which would have a better positive affect on passengers and crew.
Somebody had to kill the bill, so they sacrificed the Lt Governor to do it
by having him delay long enough to have the bill "time out".
... shake twice for Texas!
The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
If any international flights land in Texas, then I'm not sure the state has governance over the laws in the port. I may be wrong on that- I just recall something about international ports being different...
Politicians are politicians, no matter where they're from.
Texas at least limits its legislature to meeting for 140 days every two years, and only pay the assholes $7,200 per year.
I guess the slogan "Don't mess with Texas," can be taken down everywhere.
It was several elected federal officials from Texas that started all of the anti-privacy everywhere. Bush and company instituted the (UN)patriotic crap we've had since 2002. And now they don't want it used on them? If the rest of us have to live under the thumb they created, then they should also get squashed by it!
So, Texas, take your medicine and quit belly-aching!
I know. I literally have not flown anywhere since 9/11. I consider it a matter of principle to keep up with my little boycott. Whenever it is mentioned in my family, they say "oh, you don't like to fly". I say "no, I would love to fly, I just refuse to do all the stupid shit I have to do before I get on a plane". And their response is always to cock their heads like dogs learning a new word.
It's been 10 years of this, and they still find it easier to think I'm a giant pussy who doesn't want to fly, rather than accept the idea that maybe all those security checks are completely pointless. If you've *had* to fly since 9/11, you've pretty must just accepted this and gone on with your life. But to someone who still tries to do the right thing even if no one will ever notice or care, it sucks.
Yeah, pretty much.
Honestly, the ordinary hassles associated with flying are enough to make me hate it anyway. The security stuff just makes it worse. For these reasons I prefer to take the train whenever possible. For some destinations, though, it simply isn't an option.
Bow-ties are cool.
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.
"Don't mess with Texas" apparently only applies on non-Thursdays.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
... opposite-sex patdowns. I'd feel a lot more comfortable with some babe groping my junk.
And I might even fly more!
I'm afraid I concur. I am quite disappointed in Texas. I don't dislike them by any means, and would still visit their wonderful state. But their legislature folded like a cheap suit on this issue, and I just find that disheartening because if there were any state in the union I would've picked to be a battleground for this, it would've likely been Texas (Florida and Georgia being #2 and #3, due to the large number of airports in Florida, and Georgia due to Atlanta).
That being said, I'm one that refuses to fly anywhere until this nonsense has stopped. I've told my girlfriend that, should we get married, when we get ready to go on a honeymoon or any trip for that matter? If we can't drive there or go by boat, we aren't going. That I refuse to fly until the gate-rapers are gone. I value my liberty and freedom much more than that, and there's more than one way to travel around than on a stupid airplane!
The primary defense against hijacking is a plane filled with people that aren't willing to be hijacked. 9/11 already did that.
Have we no sense of decency?
It was all fun and games when it was graft and bribery on a multibillion spend to put millimeter wave scanners in a few security lines. It was obviously stupid because the devices can be fooled by concealing things in body cavities. In a sane world, the criminal justice system would put the Bush-era TSA people who planned this scheme on the stand, where they'd say "well, we thought it was a good idea at the time;" any high-school educated jury wouldn't believe a word of it, and would hand out prison sentences for the various criminals involved in the federal security bureaucracy and device vendors. Security apparatus steals tax money, news at 11, complete with body scans of preteen girls.
But in these crazy times, in for a penny, in for a pound. Instead of just letting people opt-out of being scanned (no reason not to, since the devices are only reaching a few percent of travelers anyway, and even an illiterate petty criminal can explain why they're worthless for stopping terrorism), they're trying to push the issue with the also ineffective but highly titillating federally-funded full body massage.
Perhaps it's an experiment designed to determine just how debased the American people have become - how ignorant of their own rights and heritage. In which case, well played.
With all the ways I don't seem to see eye to eye with the Tea Party and the Texas government these days, it's a genuine pleasure to find some common ground, and say, I take my hat off to them.
Tired of Political Trolls? Opt Out!
I casually talked to my wife and her girlfriend about this, and they both defended the TSA procedures, claiming they make flying safe. Somehow I suspect that TSA is the natural outcome of democracy, which equates to rule of majority.
From the article:
U.S. Attorney John Murphy delivered a letter to lawmakers Tuesday saying the bill would conflict with federal law. The letter warned legislators that TSA would "likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of the passengers and crew."
Since the TSA can't really ensure the safety of any passengers or crews, shouldn't they immediately cancel all US flights?
Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
Where's the Michael Kristopeit collective when you need it?
He might have some words for the Senate...
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
I decided that too.
I did fly after 9/11 and did have to remove my shoes but after the groping I just won't fly at all.
If it is an emergency then I will miss it.
I doubt it will ever be removed so I guess I won't be flying until I move to Canada.
It's interesting, the TSA is actually incompetant, not just evil.
They let one "terrorist" through but luckely he was also bad and failed to ignite his bomb.
Since we have the same ideals maybe we should visit. :D
What city are you in so I can fly there.
Why don't you guys have friends or journals?
...that American's don't have balls.
Look, I'm a die-hard libertarian and I've always been a "you'll have to kill me before you take my liberties" kind of guy.
However, the writing is on the wall. We've lost a ton of our civil liberties and privacy in the last decade after 9/11. We try to recover from it, somewhat futilely. But what happens the next time there is an attack? All it's going to take is one more attack - which I think is inevitable, given the rapidity at which we seem dead set on making enemies around the world. It may not happen this year. Or next. But some day, it'll happen again. And when it does, everything we embrace and everything the country stands for goes out the window. One more attack and the entire population will be shitting itself and we'll be *demanding* that the government give every man, woman and child a fucking anal probe at the airline security gates. We'll *demand* that the government read every email and keep track of every purchase and every library checkout. We will bend backwards to remit our every liberty and freedom.
All it will take . . . is one more.
"The Department of Justice has sent a letter to Texas legislative leaders warning that the rule would run counter to federal laws."
What ever happened to the 4th amendment? Isn't that federal law?
Did you see the other Slashdot story about the senate vote on extending the Patriot Act?
INTERNAL MEMORANDUM - CONFIDENTIAL: With the blaring defect of not being able to see into body cavities using our full-body scanner, we must now include cavity searches as part of our routine security checks. Any TSA employee assigned to cavity screening who has calluses or abnormally large fingers MUST NOT be switched to other duties according to equal opportunity laws in at least 10 states. Because of this, special permission is given to employees who find use of their fingers inadequate to this task to use other, more sensitive, body appendages. For liability reasons, all screenings must be recorded and stored digitally on our public FTP server, and a parent must be present when the person being screened is under 18 (though restraints may be applied to either party when necessary). Please remember that proper sanitization of all instruments and skin involved in cavity searches must be observed to avoid disease transmission on a global scale.
Welcome. You can fly in to Texas but you can't fly out. No problem, we're a big place. Welcome, Texan.
The Supremacy Clause makes the US Constitution the Supreme Law of the Land. What does the Constitution say on Air Travel?, not much considering air travel had not been invented yet. What does it state on interstate commerce?, that it cannot be stopped, and at worst it can taxed. What does it say about search and seizure?, Due Process. Would the framers of the US Constitution have allowed random, (and radioactive), strip searches of innocent women, children, and men?, hell no, especially groping women, children, and men.
So, the TSA is for some reason quoting law that stands completely against them trying to discourage Texas...
and by reading some of the other posts here, it seems like they are winning. Next time I get a speed ticket I'm going to filibuster the entire Motor Vehicle Act, and see what the judge says.
I think I would fucking snap if I had to fly these days. I flown a lot when I was young, in the service. Planes got hijacked now and then, nobody got excited about it. Not like this. The painfully simple solutions are always ignored. Put a door on the cockpit and don't open the fucking thing, and let the pilots/copilot carry a gun. But no, we lose all common sense and throw our civil liberties our founding fathers died for out the window like a bunch of pussies.
Frankly, I couldn't do this shit. They are NOT going to fucking pat me down like I am a criminal. They can fuck themselves, for I will refer to the 4th Amendment, and I will tell them I am a Vet, and a law abiding citizen. If they can't tell me from their "terrorists" then too fucking bad. I am sure the cocksuckers will bum rush me, throttle me to the ground and drag me off for interrogation. I may or may not ever be released. I am sure they will piss me off enough while man handling me to call them all Traitors and tell them they had better not EVER let me go if they have any sense of self preservation.
We haven't had this kind of intrusive rat bastard government on our asses since the British were here a couple of hundred years ago. Frankly we had more balls back then, but I will admit we've become a bunch of cleverly manipulated and brainwashed sheeple. I can't expect any REAL PATRIOTS to stand up out of this collective bunch of pussies. Fuck! Why couldn't they have done this 20 years ago, when I was more spry?
Texas needs to lead this nation in balls, and come back with even harsher legislation in regards to this Treasonous horseshit. Texans need to drag those pussies that caved in out of office. This TSA shit is nothing more than authoritarianism shoving it's cock down your throat, proving it can do so to your psychological make up. For nutless idiot lemmings, it might make them feel safe knowing someone is manhandling them for their own good, but not me. Fuck off!
Please Texas, don't pussy out on this one. We can do another Alamo if have to, people will come to support you. Like real heroes did in the days of the Alamo, they came from around the land to come fight in Texas. Draw a line in the dirt, see who stands on which side. Succeed if you have to, or not. Just don't pussy out and embarrass your forefathers.
Take the Red Pill.
they probably heard that the patriot act got re-up'd and thought the anti-patdown law wouldn't hold public support. ass-hats. the patriot act doesn't hold public support!
Better to have tried and failed than to not have tried at all. But hey, I'm sure your state is still fighting the good fight, right? Which state were you in again that was still trying to fight this?
Hub and spoke folks. DFW is home base for American. Southwest is Dallas based. Continental-United is in Houston. Let them shut major airline hubs and snarl traffic from coast to coast. Does anyone thinks the feds really have the popular support necessary to screw up the whole system over this?
I am the customer not the business. I do not engage in interstate commerce buy driving to another state. I do not enter into interstate commerce if I pay someone to drive me to another state. Why does this change just because I get on a plain? Now, the federal government may have a right to regulate the airlines, and I really don't care if TSA wants to grope all the airlines employees (though the airlines might), but I don't work for the airlines and I do not give the federal government the right to remove my right to travel between the states.
"For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice" -- God
The great thing about "libertarians" is that anything the airlines want to do to you, they can. So if the government requires that they grope you, you have to do what the private enterprise says you have to do. Prior to the TSA, that's how it was. The security was provided by the airport and directly funded (if not employed by) the private enterprises. Though that changed slightly with the TSA being directly government run, but if it was like it was before where the private companies were telling you what to do, would that make it better? It would to a libertarian. Which is another reason I'll never get libertarians, even though I consider myself one.
Why is being raped by someone so much better when that person is a private person rather than a government representative.
Learn to love Alaska
Which way to go?
Bans flights to/from Texas
Do something else
Looks like there is a Slashdot poll here.
Actually the bill passed the House UNANIMOUSLY, and wasn't shot down until Lt. Gov. Dewhurst stepped in at the last moment before it went through the Senate to reveal the DOJ's hamfisted response to the bill. Dewhurst is the architect of this collapse. It will be remembered when he runs for Governor.
Since when was flying ever meant to be fun? Except for a very small number of quite strange people (and pilots, I suppose), flying is a means of getting to an end ; whether that end is work, play, or ... What other reasons would you have. Oh, I suppose going to people's funerals couldn't be classed as either work or play. "Duty" perhaps.
But flying for the sake of flying?
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
And told him why. My work CANNOT force me to submit to an invasive pat-down, even by proxy.
Maybe the doomsday preacher John Camping was right about the end of the world coming and he was just wrong with the date.
Texas is doing something that sounds progressive.
If that isn't a sign of the apocalypse I don't know what is.
It is tout de suite.
I come here for the love
so you admit your dependancy on me? ur mum's face might have some words for the senate.
Try characterizing it as anything less to your 14-year-old, very shy, very private daughter as she's standing in line to get on a plane for a domestic flight to Washington, D.C., at the invitation of her U.S. Representative for an award. She wasn't picked to go through the scanner, but she was incredibly worried about it, and we had already agreed that she didn't have to. If it came to that, she just would not make the trip, and our Congressman would just have to deal with her absence.
<was about to comment on my observances of the theater-ish aspects and weaknesses of some of the security in congressional buildings, but should probably keep my trap shut. Not surprising to see that our Representative and his staff did not have to empty pockets or go through metal detectors, but had to stand around waiting for us every time we passed through one.>