TSA Takes Security Theater On The Road: Mobile Groping Teams Can Pop Up Anywhere
from the somehow-this-makes-me-feel-less-safe dept
Via Julian Sanchez, we learn that the TSA has apparently been taking its security theater on the road, with special mobile teams, as a part of its VIPR (Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response) program. These teams apparently show up unannounced, and start their usual groping and scanning procedures at bus stations, train and subway stations, and occasionally even on passenger cars.While the TSA is claiming it's doing this to "prevent terrorism" (of course), some are noting that the TSA is working closely with ICE on these efforts, and it often seems like these "random" searches are specifically targeting potential illegal immigrants, rather than actual terrorist threats.
Of course, no one has a problem with the general idea of stopping terrorism or enforcing the basics of the law. But it does seem highly questionable, on basic 4th Amendment points, for the TSA to just magically drop in a team that gets to search people without any other basis beyond "we're here from the TSA, and we're here to grope."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Odd...
The FBI goes after American activists and the ICE goes after "rogue sites", illegal immigrants, and Americans in general.
I guess it must be time to burn up that piece of paper that spelled out what rights people seem to have in this country.
*sigh*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Odd...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Odd...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Odd...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Odd...
Just imagine the TSA deciding they should check people on the street? They will be able to walk up to children and "pat them down". I guess the convicted child molesters now work for the TSA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What an embarrassment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What an embarrassment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What an embarrassment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What an embarrassment
Maybe we can send you a special team. Borders don't US.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm writing a letter, anyone want to sign?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whoooossssshhhhhhh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GL with that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: GL with that.
To be fair, the NYPD has, at times, set up similar search checkpoints at subway stops, including searching the contents of bags people were bringing onto the subway.
http://www.ny1.com/content/top_stories/52265/nypd-announces-bag-searches-in-subways-after -more-explosions-rock-london
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: GL with that.
I think the TSA rules are different.
that said as i have said before, we should repeal the first 10th admendements to the constitution. We are no longer protected by them, it is time to stop being hypocritical about it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: GL with that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: GL with that.
"If you refuse to be screened at any point during the screening process, the Security Officer will deny you entry beyond the screening area. You will not be able to fly."
"That person will have to remain on the premises to be questioned by the TSA and possibly by local law enforcement. Anyone refusing faces fines up to $11,000 and possible arrest."
John Tyner, the "don't touch my junk" guy, refused to be searched and was threatened with a $10,000 fine and a civil lawsuit.
A TSA manager eventually said that if Tyner would not agree to be patted down, he should be escorted from the airport. After a bit of a hassle with American Airlines, Tyner's ticket was refunded, but as he went to leave, he was stopped again by the TSA manager and another man who informed Tyner that should he complete the security check he could be "subject to a civil suit and a $10,000 fine."
I replied that he already had my information in the report that was taken and I asked if I was free to leave. I reminded him that he was now illegally detaining me and that I would not be subject to screening as a condition of leaving the airport. He told me that he was only trying to help (I should note that his demeanor never suggested that he was trying to help. I was clearly being interrogated.), and that no one was forcing me to stay. I asked if tried to leave if he would have the officer arrest me. He again said that no one was forcing me to stay. I looked him in the eye, and said, "then I'm leaving". He replied, "then we'll bring a civil suit against you", to which I said, "you bring that suit" and walked out of the airport.
So, if you enter the security checkpoint and refuse to be searched you can be detained and questioned. Neither the TSA nor a LEO can search you without further probable cause.
Just refusing to be searched is not grounds for arrest. The TSA has made the threat about fines but I don't believe they have ever followed through. Does anyone know what law such a fine would be based on?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: GL with that.
There is no such law in State or Federal jurisdictions. However, a VERY loose interpretation of the PATRIOT act could lead to an arrest without warrant on suspicion of terrorist activity simply because you refused to be searched. It would not hold up in court, but it would make your day suck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: GL with that.
As a suspected terrorist, you may be considered to "dangerous" to ever get a trial. That could make your *life* suck.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: GL with that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I hope this fails miserably
I just spent a few days in Philly, visiting the birthplace of our country and the Constitution and Bill of Rights. I can only imagine what the signers of the Declaration of Independence would think if they could see the police state we have become.
But then again, GW did lead the charge against the whiskey rebellion, which really disappoints me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I hope this fails miserably
Gotta tell you, little Johnny next door can hide ANYTHING in those paper-route bags... scares the hell outta me. PROTECT ME TSA!!!
/obvious sarcasm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I hope this fails miserably
We at the TSA know how scary it is living in this new modern world, are are here to help. Thanks to your suggestion, we're looking into setting up mobile checkpoints at house entry points to verify the security of people entering into the public area.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I hope this fails miserably
No, it's not. This is as wrong in the airports as it is in the bus stations; saying otherwise is naive and dangerous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I hope this fails miserably
Believe me, I agree completely. I have been groped once so far because I turned down the naked scanners. I don't appreciate being groped or nuked and feel it is a violation of the 4th amendment. I am a big fan of the Constitution and do not even think the license checks on our roads are legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I hope this fails miserably
But, soon, everyone will come to expect it at train and bus stations (or basically anytime they leave home) so it will be perfectly alright there too. See how that works?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I hope this fails miserably
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whoooooo!
Thanks, TSA!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Whoooooo!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Some people call these zones "Constitution free zones" because border patrols can search without any legal impediment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Constitution free zones
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/0110609/22335214647/is-pretending-your-domain-name-has- been-seized-ice-new-rickroll.shtml#c801
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110609/22335214647/is-pretending-your-domain-name-has -been-seized-ice-new-rickroll.shtml#c801
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
First off, since the TSA doesn't ask for ID, there is no "going after immigrants" here. That is your first tip that this is a scare tactic story. Second, there is no indication of "groping", again a nice scary term.
The funniest part is that if there was a bombing in a subway or train system, I am sure the same people bitching about this would show up complaining that the TSA (or other agencies) didn't do enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Nope. I'd want someone competent to show up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Well, I am not convinced that anything the TSA is doing is actually effective in the first place.
But, yeah, I might bitch about the other agencies. Especially after slowly eroding our civil rights on things like warrantless wiretapping, GPS tracking, electronic communication monitoring, etc. all in the name of preventing terrorism. If these agencies fail to prevent a terrorist attack, then I want my rights back immediately.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Do we need to have TSA and DHS stationed in every street corner to keep your logic happy?
Terror has won. We have submitted to our fears.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Speak for yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: groping
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/on-air/as-seen-on/Woman_claims_new_TSA_Security_Protocol_amo unts_to_legalized_groping_Los_Angeles-106802483.html
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2010/11/j ohn_tyner_tsa_search.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgqPmDpUv10
http://www.youtube.com/wat ch?v=ADZUQUfJoBk&feature=related
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Those who choose safety over liberty . . .
If you're interested in the Border Search Exception, I've written a brief overview here: http://www.lextechnologiae.com/2011/06/03/strip-searches-of-the-mind-why-the-government-can-search-y our-laptop-at-the-border/
I also have a paper arguing for reasonable suspicion being required in laptop border searches, and it also goes over the border search exception here: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1469292
As for other transportation related searches, there is good reason to think the TSA may be overstepping its bounds, but there is also pessimistic reasons for believing the courts will look the other way in the name of safety.
I've also written on the TSA searches and the Fourth Amendment, and my post links to some excellent law review articles on TSA screening at airports (the legality of which will be shared by the likes of AmTrak).
You can read that post here: http://www.lextechnologiae.com/2010/11/18/tsa-scans-patdowns-do-these-violate-the-4th-amendment-mayb e/
I'm optimistic the tea party folks, as much as I disagree with them on so many issues, will help bring this chapter of 4th Amendment violations to a close.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Those who choose safety over liberty . . .
"A search at the border’s functional equivalent is constitutionally valid when:
(1) a reasonable certainty exists that the person or thing crossed the border;
(2) a reasonable certainty exists that there was no change in the object of the search since it crossed the border; and
(3) the search was conducted as soon as practicable after the border crossing.
For the most part, the border search exception is not going to apply to any of the VIPR checkpoints. However, ICE agents can question or detain individuals anywhere in the U.S. to determine, for example, if aliens have a right to be in the U.S. One thing I am sure they cannot do at a VIPR checkpoint is search your laptop or the contents of other electronic devices.
The TSA is using all the powers they have at airports at any of these VIPR checkpoints. This includes search of your any bags, purses etc. and a physical search of you.
Additionally, they are radiation detectors, and explosives detection such as dogs. It would be interesting to know if they ever use drug detecting dogs.
As with the TSA at airports you can always decline to be searched but with the penalty of not being able to ride the train, bus, subway, or trolley. If I had brought my bomb with me I would just come back when the VIPR checkpoint is no longer there. There was even a sign at the entrance to a train station building, during a VIPR checkpoint, warning that you should expect to be searched.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Those who choose safety over liberty . . .
(1) a reasonable certainty exists that the person or thing crossed the border;
(2) a reasonable certainty exists that there was no change in the object of the search since it crossed the border; and
(3) the search was conducted as soon as practicable after the border crossing.
I don't know where you got that, since you conveniently failed to cite the source, but that's not the way it works. Plenty of people, myself included, have been stopped by government agents even though they didn't cross the border.
As with the TSA at airports you can always decline to be searched but with the penalty of not being able to ride the train, bus, subway, or trolley.
Or use the highways (you conveniently left that part out). You should not be subject to penalty for exercising your rights.
If I had brought my bomb with me I would just come back when the VIPR checkpoint is no longer there.
Because only people with bombs would object, eh? What a crock.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Those who choose safety over liberty . . .
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/RL31826.pdf
I have a comment further down about the highways and passenger cars. I didn't include it because I don't think the cars or people in them were physically searched. If I am mistaken, and it is a guess as the news link about it does not have much information, then a lawsuit should be brought to stop the practice.
My point about the bomb was not about the degradation of 4th amendment rights. Rather, it was about how ineffective random but very visible searches would be to stop terrorist attacks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Those who choose safety over liberty . . .
There are some exceptions apart from the border search exception but without probable cause these are very restrictive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
4th Amendment and Travel
Aircraft
Bus
Train
Subway
Ship
Car
If you whiners don't want to be harassed, just avoid these.
Will you libertarians please stop complaining?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
I hear it only takes 12 years to get citizenship in Switzerland..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
Motorcycle
Bicycle
Pedestrian
And these are probably only safe for the time being, and only because they are limited in the number of people that can be transported via the vehicle.
The next to be stopped with be either Pedestrians because they can march en mass, or Bicycles because of a phenomena known as a Peloton or Paceline.
Watch out, Tour de France cyclists, TSA gropers may attempt to mobilize there to make sure your peloton isn't carrying any bombs under those saddles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
Places to avoid if you wish to retain 4th amendment protections:
Your home
Anywhere other than your home
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
The 4th amendment still applies while traveling for people who are unattractive to the TSA gropers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 4th Amendment and Travel
I suspect you're an apologist of some sort.
It would be problematic for them to even question the driver or passengers in light of the fact that anti-drunk checkpoints have to be announced in advance and that the driver has to be able to avoid the checkpoint after seeing it (or is that only California?).
Maybe it would be better to refrain from making uninformed comments, then.
At any rate, what happens if you refuse a search or questioning? Do they force you to turn around and drive back to wherever you got your bomb?
Because we all know that anyone who doesn't want to be irradiated or groped must have a bomb, huh? "If you have nothing to hide, then you ave nothing to fear"?
It's like saying, at an airport when you refuse a search, that you can't travel to NY but you can go to Seattle.
Not if you're *flying* to Seattle, unless, of course, you happen to be wealthy enough to charter a private plane or even own your own. Then you can do whatever you want. (Can't pull this crap on them, they've got the money to get somebody fired!)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Second, I remember several people saying that once you're in the airport, you're legally obliged to go through security. What about at the bus terminal? At the train station? There is a fourth amendment for a reason, and that is for the average person to feel safe and secure from unreasonable searches, especially from simply taking public transportation! This has gone too far. What's next? Random pat-downs of pedestrians on the street?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
More power to you. I *live* here and I don't travel anymore. I just know that being forced to choose between being irradiated and having some McDonald's reject grabbing my junk would just end unpleasantly for all concerned.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Sometimes there just isn't a "better" country to move to. That's why the US founding fathers started their own. Too bad what happened to it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Idea!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Idea!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Welcome to...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Welcome to...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fools...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I was planning a trip to California and to Georgia...which suddenly I'm rethinking. I think I'd feel as if I were playing roulette no matter which mode of transportation I take.
Time to head east or west for me...but definitely not south. At least, not until I grow a pair of wings on my back and can fly myself there. But of course, the Air Force might end up shooting me down anyways.
For some odd reason, this puts me in mind of an old movie with Kurt Russell...escape from New York where NY was turned into a giant maximum security prison...it appears now this might have been premonition instead of fantasy...the next movie will be "Escape from the USA".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Having read this article, I am reconsidering the first of those three actions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Witnessed these myself
While they thankfully weren't groping anyone, they would not allow you on the train unless you let them search your bag. These are trains that people rely on to get to work (and often prepay for) and they appeared without warning one day. My choices were submit to search, or not go to work I guess.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Security theater, coming to a theater near you.
Disclaimer: This show has not yet been rated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mobile TSA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Obligatory Horatio Caine.
This case might...
*puts on sunglasses*
...sting a little.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Obligatory Horatio Caine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Where are the "just take a bus or drive" trolls, now?
So, two things:
1. Everybody with a conscience must have quietly resigned or transferred out of ICE. The New Yorker article on Thomas Drake and the NSA (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/05/23/110523fa_fact_mayer) shows that some NSA people had consciences, and resigned over un-American activities. I will graciously assume this is true of ICE as well. Shame on the rest of the nest of VIPRs: Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln and King would all be ashamed of louts such as yourself.
2. Where did all the "just take a bus, train or drive" trolls? What's next internal passports? Little "living permits" like the Soviet Union used to have? Terrorism isn't the new communism, it's even better... for the New Security State thugs and bureacrats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Where are the "just take a bus or drive" trolls, now?
They've now become the "just stay at home" trolls.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here is the plan against the infidels
Since they have now been trained/conditioned to complete obedience to the TSA (at their own expense haha) we will begin disguising our holy warriors as these Agents in order to infiltrate and place ourselves in position to accomplish great works.
Please pick up your Blue Shirt, Badge, latex gloves and 5 kilos of SemTex from the distribution agents. Begin practicing these American phrases:
"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear."
"Please step this way."
"I'm only following orders."
"Why do you hate freedom?"
"I need to see your junk."
You may entertain yourselves with random practices of this infiltration until you get the GREEN signal, which should be some time in the near future. But do not lose sight of the Goal.
Your virgins await you.
JoMama Bin Layin'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
thank you for the many years that you have been a wonderful country. I'm gonna miss you and all the good times we spent. since you've left I've gotten terrified of your replacement. he grabs my privates in public places and sticks his tongue out whenever I complain. I'm gonna miss you USA. thanks for all the good times
sincerely
Deane Truelove
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kent Brockman reporting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
can't get away
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Reasonable Request
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I actually do have a problem with "fighting terrorism"
The latter has killed a myriad Iraqis, countless Afghanis, created thousands of extra fantatics who didn't start out hating America but certainly do now after a drone blew up their house, their kids and their wife, has shredded the US constitution, is hastening the march of fascism in the USA and the world, causes incredible delays and costs related to anything to do with travel, especially by air, and is furthermore used as an excuse for every egregious violation of human rights in the USA and world-wide.
Terrorism itself has killed a few thousand people over the years and the chance of anyone dying of a terrorist attack is massively lower than the risk of dying by slipping in the tub at home!
Let's stop for just one short second and contemplate which is worse here, the disease or the putative cure?
Of course we should have police, and that police should be extremely heavily monitored to make sure they don't overstep their authority. If that hampers their efficiency somewhat then that's the way it has to be. This TSA BS? This is just unacceptable and outrageous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SO
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
VIPR == Terrorist attack squad
Now, all the terrorists have to do is dress up as a TSA VIPR team and they'll be able to carry out whatever terrorist action they like!
Hey wait a minute, are you sure those VIPR teams are _actually_ sent out by the TSA? Maybe Al Quaeda is doing it as part of a recruiting drive?
Next time anyone sees a VIPR team, I suggest calling the FBI and reporting the potential terrorist recruiting cell operation you're witnesssing!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now "the question of bargaining rights at TSA is not a matter of 'if' but 'when,' " said John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees, in a statement applauding the choice. "We are confident that the appointment of Mr. Southers as administrator will help put that matter to bed."
It really does not matter one bit that he has any skills in keeping us safe It was an appeasement appointment for the unions to gain more power and funding. The real threat is not the terrorist that he is suppose to be stopping but the growing expansion of the Unions in that protective cover that we all have to depend upon for our safety.
It is as plain as day the reason for his appointment has nothing to do with Airport security but everything to do with Union job security
And now they are demanding new powers that will allow them to close off a state from another over an Union dispute which the Supreme court has The Freedom from Union Violence Act of 1997[1] and 2007[2] were identical bills proposed in the United States Congress. Their intended purpose was to amend the Hobbs Act and make violence committed in pursuit of labor union goals a federal crime. They would impose a fine of up to $100,000, 20 years imprisonment, or both, on labor unions that commit or threaten to use violence, extortion, or the obstruction of commerce in the furtherance of labor union goals and objectives.
“The bills faced strong opposition from labor unions and others, especially for the clause that would disallow "obstruction of commerce," and failed to pass into law both times. Opponents noted that violence and extortion were already crimes, and argued that there was no need to pass a special law setting aside union violence and union extortion as being especially heinous.”
But now on a silver platter they want to destroy the Constitution
[ link to this | view in chronology ]