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.
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.
i guess pretty soon every kiddy fiddler and other person who is into indecent assault will be working for the TSA, paid for by the US government. Great work.
If they're not "investigative or law enforcement officers", then they can not detain you, and you should be able to walk right past the security checkpoint.
If you told someone back in the 90's that in order to get on a flight now you'd have to give a 3D scan of your naked body they'd accuse you of being some conspiracy tinfoil hat nutter who smokes too much weed.
Good idea.
That's exactly what that restaurant owner did when she told Mr. Trump's propaganda woman to leave her restaurant.
There should be consequences for bad behaviour.
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.
Then what is their function?
Security theater.
Sovereign immunity confuses the heck out of me. The idea that law enforcement is immune to prosecution is preposterous. The very concept seems to violate the 5th amendment to the constitution. Someone needs to hold them accountable.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
It seems quite obvious to me that someone having the power to hold someone for 18 hours arbitrarily is not someone you want immune from prosecution. I get that the government doesn't want every criminal suing the police because they can, but the current situation seems ripe for abuse. A TSA screener should not hold that kind of power. Maybe we need to permit liability in the event that the person is acquitted or charges dropped, like what happened here?
we did exactly what we wanted them to do. We freaked the hell out, got involved in several pointless wars that are killing our nation (our infrastructure crumbles while we waste trillions in Iraq/Afghanistan). They played us like a harp.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
No, that is not exactly the same thing.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders was was hounded out of a restaurant because people didn't want her there. I wouldn't either. But if she was in a car wreck and in danger of dying, I for one wouldn't hesitate a split-second about saving her, no matter what I think of her politics or relationship with the truth.
Humanity first. Then politics.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
It's a private establishment. So they should have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason.
Well...
Whether it's because they don't feel like serving women,
No
or mexicans
No
or 2 fags wanting a cake.
Alas, I'll give you that, given the recent SCOTUS ruling. Sexual orientation is not yet a protected status, but perhaps someday it will be.
Sometimes life just isn't fair.
"Sometimes?" More like often. But let us endeavour to continue to expand the boundaries of fairness.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Which side of the political spectrum has reined in the TSA? Did Bush? Did Obama? Has Trump?
So who should the Americans vote for?
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-