Slashdot Mirror


TSA Screeners Win Immunity From Abuse Claims, Court Rules (reuters.com)

Mr.Intel writes from a report via Reuters: "Fliers may have a tough time recovering damages for invasive screenings at U.S. airport security checkpoints, after a federal appeals court on Wednesday said screeners are immune from claims under a federal law governing assaults, false arrests and other abuses," reports Reuters. In a 2-1 vote, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screeners are shielded from liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) because they do not function as "investigative or law enforcement officers."

The decision, the first on the issue by a federal appeals court, was a defeat for Nadine Pellegrino, a business consultant from Boca Raton, Florida. "She and her husband had sued for false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution over a July 2006 altercation at Philadelphia International Airport," reports Reuters. According to court papers, Pellegrino had been randomly selected for additional screening at the Philadelphia airport before boarding a U.S. Airways flight to Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Pellegrino, then 57, objected to the invasiveness of the search, but conditions deteriorated and she was later jailed for about 18 hours, the papers show. Criminal charges were filed, and Pellegrino was acquitted at a March 2008 trial.

3 of 317 comments (clear)

  1. So now they're like cops... by snapsnap · · Score: 5, Interesting

    in that they have immunity from behind held accountable from breaking the law. The worse thing though for the TSA is that they have less training and don't have to take an oath like cops do so this is even worse.

  2. It's not right but I understand by sjbe · · Score: 1, Interesting

    That's still a pretty nasty attitude.

    Yes it is though you can make an argument that they are simply reaping what they've sown. This administration has been, ahem... less than tolerant of others, so it's somewhat ironic that they would get upset when it happens back at them. I'm not saying the behavior was right or should be condoned but I do admit to a bit of schadenfreude when I heard about it. To paraphrase Chris Rock, I'm not saying it's right but I understand...

    If there is someone in a restaurant that you don't like, take a deep breath, suppress your penchant for political belligerence, and mind your own business.

    That is the appropriate and civil behavior. It would be nice if our current president and his cronies would return the favor.

  3. Re:Intolerance by tsstahl · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sure and the right never does that. Tell you what, go ahead and tell a conservative christian that you are gay and that jesus is a lie and see what happens to you.

    You get blessed and a promise of prayer for your eternal soul? Oh the horror. ;)