||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WIRED - U.S. airline passengers near the security checkpoint can be
searched any time and no longer can refuse consent by leaving the
airport, the nation's largest federal appeals court ruled. The decision
by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the circuit's
34-year-old precedent that over time was evolving toward limiting when
passengers could refuse a search and leave the airport after they had
checked their bags or placed items on the security screening X-ray
machine. Citing threats of terrorism, the court ruled passengers give up
all rights to be free of warrantless searches once a "passenger places
hand luggage on a conveyor belt for inspection" or "passes though a
magnetometer."
"Requiring that a potential passenger be allowed to revoke consent to an
ongoing airport security search makes little sense in a post-9/11
world," Judge Carlos Bea wrote for the unanimous 15-judge panel. "Such a
rule would afford terrorists multiple opportunities to attempt to
penetrate airport security by 'electing not to fly' on the cusp of
detection until a vulnerable portal is found.". . .
In 1973, the circuit court ruled that airport searches were valid "only
if they recognize the right of a person to avoid search by electing not
to board the aircraft." In later rulings, the court began backing off,
ruling passengers could not opt out of searches if they had checked
luggage or if carry-on items were flagged during the initial screening
to enter the terminal area.
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/08/court-says-trav.html
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
WIRED - U.S. airline passengers near the security checkpoint can be
searched any time and no longer can refuse consent by leaving the
airport, the nation's largest federal appeals court ruled. The decision
by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the circuit's
34-year-old precedent that over time was evolving toward limiting when
passengers could refuse a search and leave the airport after they had
checked their bags or placed items on the security screening X-ray
machine. Citing threats of terrorism, the court ruled passengers give up
all rights to be free of warrantless searches once a "passenger places
hand luggage on a conveyor belt for inspection" or "passes though a
magnetometer."
"Requiring that a potential passenger be allowed to revoke consent to an
ongoing airport security search makes little sense in a post-9/11
world," Judge Carlos Bea wrote for the unanimous 15-judge panel. "Such a
rule would afford terrorists multiple opportunities to attempt to
penetrate airport security by 'electing not to fly' on the cusp of
detection until a vulnerable portal is found.". . .
In 1973, the circuit court ruled that airport searches were valid "only
if they recognize the right of a person to avoid search by electing not
to board the aircraft." In later rulings, the court began backing off,
ruling passengers could not opt out of searches if they had checked
luggage or if carry-on items were flagged during the initial screening
to enter the terminal area.
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/08/court-says-trav.html
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
No comments:
Post a Comment