TSA Insists That There's Been No Delay In Public Hearings Over Nudie Scanners; It Just Hasn't Held Them

from the got-that dept

A few weeks back, we noted that a court had ordered the TSA to explain why it had failed to obey the court's earlier order that, while the nudie scanners being used in airports were legal, the TSA was required to hold public hearings on the purchase and use of the machines. Yet no such hearings have happened. The TSA has now responded and essentially said that since there's no deadline on when the court told them to hold a hearing, there's no problem. Basically "we can hold a hearing whenever we get around to it."

It also blames the fact that there had been "significant personnel losses" in the group of folks responsible for obeying the order, but insisted that everyone else in that group was really (really!) focused on obeying the order, and they'd get around to it at some point. Really. They promise.

Petitioner offers no basis whatsoever for its assertion that TSA has delayed in implementing this Court’s mandate. On the contrary, as the Sammon Declaration demonstrates, TSA has been keenly aware of the importance of implementing the Court’s directive, and has given high priority to the AIT rulemaking. Despite “significant personnel losses” in the group of economists within TSA charged with completing the regulatory analysis... the agency began on the heels of the Court’s ruling the process of preparing the documents necessary for notice-andcomment rulemaking, and has devoted almost all of the staff available to conduct the required economic analysis to its expedited completion, even going so far as to hire contract consultants to accelerate its completion despite unforeseen personnel losses

Later, it claims:

In sum, there has been no "waiting" and no "delay."

Other than the fact that we're still waiting, you mean?

Filed Under: delay, public hearings, scanners, tsa

Appeals Court Wants To Know Why TSA Is Ignoring Court Order Over Public Hearings On Naked Scanners

from the we're-the-gov't,-we-can-ignore-stuff dept

About a year ago, we wrote about a court ruling that the TSA's naked scanners were legal (they didn't violate the 4th Amendment's restriction on "unreasonable" searches), but that the TSA failed to hold the proper public hearings before buying and deploying them. The TSA appears to have only paid attention to the first part. After a bunch of folks asked why the TSA was ignoring the order for public hearings, now an appeals court has officially weighed in and demanded to know why the TSA has failed to hold public hearings more than a year after that court ruling. The order is pretty straightforward:

ORDERED that the Department of Homeland Security, et al., respond to the petition on or before August 30, 2012.

The TSA has said that it would hold hearings "next year" (or two years after it was ordered to do so). You would think that it wouldn't take the TSA two years to set up basic hearings -- especially while it has continued to roll out a variety of new scanning machines...

Filed Under: court order, privacy, public hearings, scanners, tsa

USTR Will Listen To The Public On Creating Its 'IP Axis Of Evil' List?

from the let's-wait-and-see... dept

Among copyright experts and copyright policy folks, it seems widely recognized that the US Trade Rep's "Special 301" review process has been a massive joke. Last year, at an event discussing copyright, even folks from the US Copyright Office laughed off the Special 301 report. Historically, what it's been is the entertainment industry putting together a list of countries that don't have draconian enough copyright laws, and it gets the USTR to complain about them and put them on a "watch list" of sorts. Pretty much everyone who understands these issues knows it's a complete joke, but unfortunately there are lots of people who don't understand these issues, and it lets diplomats and politicians make laughable claims like saying that Canada is a hub for piracy -- and the press almost never questions where that information came from because it sounds all official.

So it's nice to hear that apparently the USTR is opening up the Special 301 review process to the public (slightly) in not just asking for written input, but also holding a public hearing for the first time ever (via Michael Geist). That said, I'm not convinced this will really make a huge difference. Since this is a discussion about what foreign countries are doing with their copyright laws that doesn't directly affect most of the American public directly (though we can be concerned about the fallout). So who's going to take part? The usual suspects form the industry will, asking for increased protectionism designed entirely to prop up their business models, rather than actually looking at a country's copyright laws. But will others really have enough to say? KEI plans to submit something, and does a good job cautiously praising the slightly more open process, but worrying about whether it will actually make a difference.

Filed Under: 301 report, copyright, public hearings, special interests, transparency, ustr