Motion Filed In 1st Circuit To Enjoin TSA's New Mandatory "AIT" Screening (google.com)
New submitter saizai writes: TSA has made electronic strip search mandatory whenever they feel like it. "TSA is updating the AIT PIA to reflect a change to the operating protocol regarding the ability of individuals to opt out of AIT screening in favor of physical screening. While passengers may generally decline AIT screening in favor of physical screening, TSA may direct mandatory AIT screening for some passengers as warranted by security considerations in order to safeguard transportation security." I've filed for an injunction against new TSA policy on mandatory AIT, in my general lawsuit challenging TSA's "orders". The court says TSA will respond to my motion by Tuesday. I'll reply immediately. Hopefully will have it put on hold before January. (Note that "AIT" stands for "Advanced Imaging Technology," the term TSA applies to walk-through body scanners.)
Thanks. :-)
Fair question, but with a simple answer: I've not said anything online that I haven't already said in court and/or isn't very blatantly obvious. I don't disclose pending litigation strategy or the like that might be damaging, nor anything private, privileged, etc.
I think it's beneficial to raise public awareness. Part of why they responded to me at all was because TSA's PR people (howdy, Curtis!) read the 2013 BoingBoing article about my SFO experience and had a subsequent internal shitstorm. (How do I know? Several hundred pages of FOIA docs — ones I haven't published yet.)
http://s.ai - http://s.ai/foia - http://s.ai/tsa/legal - https://patreon.com/saizai
Depends on exactly what the 1st Circuit rules. I very strongly doubt they would rule I don't have standing (which would be the worst case outcome for my ability to prosecute this).
It's possible they might not want to allow an emergency PI/TRO, in which case it'll get delayed on fuller briefing, probably ~1-6 months. They also might deny preliminary injunction and TRO, without prejudice to an ordinary motion for injunction, in which case we're talking 6-12 months.
It's also possible that they'll rule that yes the TSA violated the APA (again) but they'll let 'em get away with it anyway (like in EPIC v DHS, 653 F3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2011)). That would be the worst case outcome on substance. I'd probably try for SCOTUS cert petition if that happens.
We'll find out in about a week, anyway, so no need to speculate too much. Follow me on G+ or Twitter, or watch my TSA litigation page if you want updates. ;-)
http://s.ai - http://s.ai/foia - http://s.ai/tsa/legal - https://patreon.com/saizai
Being raped & tortured by the police is only worth a 1.6 million dollar slap on the wrist with no criminal penalties against the offenders... the 4th amendment seems to have fallen out of favor.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans