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."

Filed Under: privacy, searches, tsa

Tonight On Security Theater: After Hours Airport Antics Expose Security Tunnel Vision

from the pay-no-attention-to-the-men-beyond-the-checkpoint dept

We've written quite a bit, recently, about the more controversial actions of the TSA and their airport screening practices. And now there's a somewhat amusing story that demonstrates why many people think that doing things like groping little children -- and claiming that it's not only proper, but necessary -- is really just security theater. Two travelers, stranded at Dallas-Fort Worth airport, made the local news after filming themselves goofing around in the terminal, after hours. A DFW airport board member was not amused and vows that this kind of thing is "not going to happen again." However, this isn't the first time something like this has happened (though it might be a first at DFW), so it kind of makes you wonder why the security folks hadn't already taken steps to prevent this. Of course, it looks like these guys were just having fun, but doesn't it seem like a couple of guys wandering unchecked in a nearly empty terminal might be a bit more of a security risk than a toddler's underwear? Apparently, the experts don't think so:

Aviation security experts who have seen the video say it doesn’t show any major security concerns because the two guys were ticketed passengers who had already been screened by the TSA.

Hmm, so, the fact that they were "ticketed" and "already screened" means that there's nothing that they could have gotten their hands on, as they made their way through the terminal (at one point, entering the kitchen of a restaurant), that might pose a threat to other travelers? While I don't think anyone should be freaking out about these incidents, they do seem to lend credence to the idea that many of the actions taken by the TSA are just for show, while obvious security holes are left wide open. They'll go out of their way to make sure a baby isn't the next underwear bomber, but can't even send someone to remind some marauding men to stick to the designated passenger areas and quit messing with airport property? Good show.

Filed Under: airports, security, security theater, tsa

Anti-TSA Groping Bill May Come Back To Life In Texas?

from the don't-mess-with-texas? dept

After Texas politicians (new motto: "don't mess with Texas, unless you threaten to take away our airplanes") backed down on a proposal to make TSA-style gropings illegal unless the TSA could show the Constitutional basis for them, many pointed out that the bill could not be reintroduced this session. However, according to Kashmir Hill, a loophole and a whole bunch of protesters complaining about politicians backing down may mean that the bill has one more chance this year.

Lt. Governor David Dewhurst, who was one of the main reasons why the bill died in the first place, has now asked the Governor, Rick Perry, to call the bill during a 30-day special session that resulted from the state's budget fight. Hill notes that Perry might not be willing to take on this issue, due to his own presidential aspirations, but Perry has a history of going his own way on certain things, so it could happen. I'm still not sure the bill really has enough support to make it, but it certainly would create an entertaining legal fight...

Filed Under: groping, texas, tsa

Texas Politicians Back Off Anti-TSA Bill After Being Warned Of Potential Flight Loss

from the don't-mess-with-texas? dept

Apparently, the new slogan for Texas is "don't mess with Texas... unless you threaten to stop all flights out of Texas... because then we'll fold." Following the US Justice Department warning the state that if it passed the bill to make overly aggressive TSA gropings illegal, the TSA might have to stop all flights originating in Texas. And, rather than call the feds' bluff, Texas politicians have shelved the bill. Apparently, this means the same bill cannot be reintroduced this session. Some have pointed out that the bill probably didn't have enough support to make it through anyway, but it makes you wonder how much of that was due to threats from the feds.

Filed Under: flights, groping, texas, tsa

Justice Department Threatens To Ban Flights Out Of Texas If Texas Makes TSA Groping Illegal

from the showdown dept

We've already covered the proposal in Texas to make TSA airport gropings illegal, and we've already noted that the TSA insists that it can safely ignore such a law (an argument that some dispute). However, now the Justice Department is apparently telling the Texas legislature that if it passes the law, flights out of Texas could be banned:

If HR 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute. Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.

That's a mighty big stick the feds are pulling out there. The sponsor of the bill says the whole thing is ridiculous. He notes (quite craftily) that the bill clearly exempts TSA officials from being liable for criminal prosecution under the bill, if they can show the Constitutional reasons that allow them to grope anyone's private parts:

"The bill clearly states that an agent is exempt from prosecution as long as a constitutionally sanctioned federal law directs them to perform the invasive, indecent groping searches-including touching breasts, sexual organs and buttocks," noted State Representative David Simpson (R-Longview), the bill's author.

"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.

"All that HB 1937 does is require that the TSA abide by the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution," Simpson continued. "We aren't even prohibiting the pat-downs, per se. We're just saying you can't go straight to third base. You have to have a reason-you have to have probable cause-before groping someone's sexual organs."

Things certainly could get interesting. In the meantime, perhaps don't plan too many trips that involve flying out of Texas in the near future.

Filed Under: flights, groping, texas, tsa

TSA Lies About The Constitution In Defending Pat Downs

from the shocker dept

A few weeks back, we noted some plans in Texas to make the TSA patdowns illegal. We were curious as to what would happen if the bill passed. And while it has been moving forward, the TSA put out a blog post recently claiming that the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution meant that states could not regulate federal agencies:

What's our take on the Texas House of Representatives voting to ban the current TSA pat-down? Well, the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article. VI. Clause 2) prevents states from regulating the federal government.

Well, Boing Boing points us to an analysis of that claim, which suggests it's all kinds of wrong -- and wrong in a manner that suggests the anonymous TSA blogger knows it's wrong (i.e., the TSA is flat-out lying):

The problem here? The statement is false. Ignorance from the TSA is unlikely, so I’ll call a spade a spade. They’re lying.

The supremacy clause says nothing of the sort.

Of course, some of this may come down to interpretations of the Supremacy Clause, but it certainly appears that the TSA is stretching the definition (quite a bit) to pretend that it means no federal agency can be constrained by a state government. It seems pretty sad how frequently it appears our federal government is purposely misstating or misinterpreting the Constitution.

Filed Under: pat downs, supremacy clause, tsa

DHS Boss: 'Very, Very, Very Few People Get A Pat Down'; Reality: ~1.8 Million People Per Month

from the ministry-of-truth dept

With all of the talk about the TSA airport gropings, Homeland Security boss Janet Napolitano has been a bit on the defensive about the procedure. In answering questions at a press club lunch, she claimed specifically that "very, very, very few people get a pat down," and that it only happens in "under very limited circumstances." She also joked that whenever anyone does get groped, those "tend to get on YouTube."

The obvious suggestion here is that people are making a big deal out of nothing, and very few people are getting "legally" sexually assaulted by our government. Of course, when you claim "very, very, very few" people are getting this kind of "service," it seems you ought to be able to back that up. The folks over at Politifact decided to dig in, and while no one was particularly forthcoming, they got enough info from enough sources (including some data from the TSA) that suggested approximately 1.8 million people per month are getting groped for their own safety. That doesn't sound like very, very, very few. Hell, it doesn't even sound like very few.

Of course, it's unlikely that there will be any ramifications for Napolitano out and out lying to the press concerning government mandated groping. Instead, plenty of people will continue to believe this is an issue that doesn't really affect that many people. Until they get groped.

Filed Under: dhs, janet napolitano, pat downs, tsa

Congress Wants To Cut Funds To The TSA For Naked Scanners

from the looks-like-someone's-paying-attention dept

Via Slashdot we learned that the House Appropriations Committee's latest plan specifically cuts funding for the TSA's naked body scanners. In the section about the TSA, it notes:

The bill includes $7.8 billion for the TSA, an increase of $125 million over last year’s level, and $293 million below the President’s request. These funds will be used to sustain the current cap level of 46,000 full time screening personnel, and for explosive detection systems, security enforcement, cargo inspections, Federal Air Marshals, and other TSA activities. The bill also includes an additional $10 million to address air cargo threats. However, the bill does not provide $76 million requested by the President for 275 additional advanced inspection technology (AIT) scanners nor the 535 staff requested to operate them.

This won't stop the many such machines already in service, but could potentially slow the expansion of the use of such machines. Of course, I'm sure one carefully placed "soft on terrorists!" fear mongering report will ensure such machines get funded soon enough anyway.

Filed Under: congress, funds, scanners, tsa

TSA Frisks A Baby; Says The Stroller Set Off 'Explosives' Alarm

from the younger-and-younger dept

A few weeks ago, we wrote about the TSA groping a six-year-old and then defending it because it was "standard operating proecedures." Once again, the TSA is getting attention for a questionable patdown, this time going much, much younger, with a photo being shown of a patdown of a baby: Once again, the TSA is quick to respond on its blog, insisting again that there's nothing out of the ordinary here:

We reviewed the screening of this family, and found that the child’s stroller alarmed during explosives screening. Our officers followed proper current screening procedures by screening the family after the alarm, who by the way were very cooperative and were on the way to their gate in no time. The child in the photo was simply receiving a modified pat-down which doesn’t even come close to what the headline implies.

I'm curious how the family being cooperative makes this okay? After all, didn't the TSA just admit that complaining about the TSA may subject you to further scrutiny? It seems like everyone who doesn't want to get that extra special attention is going to be friendly and cooperative.

Filed Under: baby, security, tsa

Texas Legislature Looks To Make TSA Groping Procedures Illegal

from the don't-mess-with-texas dept

We've discussed an attempt in New Hampshire to make TSA agents liable to be accused of sexual assault for patdowns, and now we learn that a bill is making its way through the Texas legislature that would criminalize the aggressive groping procedures, if there is no "probable cause." That choice of words is obviously quite intentional, as the idea is to refer back to the 4th Amendment. Unfortunately, courts have not found that such airport searches violate the 4th Amendment, though they've become ever more intrusive over the years.

The big question, of course, is what happens if this bill passes and becomes a law (apparently it has a large number of co-sponsors). It would create a difficult position for TSA agents in Texas, and I imagine a lawsuit would eventually be needed to resolve things. But all of that depends on whether or not the bill will ever actually pass. I could definitely see the White House putting pressure on Texas' governor to veto the bill... Still, with various states now looking to pass laws against these procedures, isn't it time the administration and the TSA reconsider these procedures?

Filed Under: groping, texas, tsa