Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate - "24 hour no-fly list with the TSA"

I think this college kid was a victim of a power tripping screener.

"...Emerson is a student at Luther College, a private school in Iowa. Through Orbitz, he’d booked a one-way ticket from Minneapolis to Tanzania via United Airlines and Ethiopian Airlines. The ticket was issued by Ethiopian, which means that it got the money from Orbitz and set the fare rules.

You can probably guess what happened next. A college student flying to Africa on a one-way ticket is bound to set off all kinds of alarms with the TSA. Sure enough, an agent pulled Emerson aside and questioned him, causing him to miss his flight. “Even though my passport is legitimate and my answers proved to be the truth, the agent could not remove me from a 24-hour no-fly list with the TSA,” Emerson says..."

http://www.elliott.org/blog/whos-responsible-for-my-missed-connection/

I'd go back to the airport and hand the FSD a bill for the ticket cost, plus the additional fare to fly back. An agent making up a BS "24-hour no-fly list" and causing someone to miss their flight would be enough for me to contact an attorney and see about a lawsuit on the grounds of unlawful detention.

Assuming that the story is accurate, I see the following apology coming from the TSA:

"We apologize if Mr. Emerson felt inconvenienced by his experience. Our primary concern is for the safety of all passengers and we believe that the organization acted appropriately in this instance."

Mike

P.S., Sorry, T.J. Bender, out for the next two weeks. You'll have to make fish puns with Goalie.

You forgot "out of an abundance of caution, we suggested he relax for a day before continuing his travels".

Assuming that the story is accurate, I see the following apology coming from the TSA:

"We apologize if Mr. Emerson felt inconvenienced by his experience. Our primary concern is for the safety of all passengers and we believe that the organization acted appropriately in this instance."

Mike

P.S., Sorry, T.J. Bender, out for the next two weeks. You'll have to make fish puns with Goalie.

I anticipate an apology more like this:

"We apologize if Mr. Emerson felt that he was inconvenienced by this experience. Our officers were concerned that Mr. Emerson might pose a safety threat and acted accordingly and appropriately in denying him access to the sterile area. We have been unable to corroborate Mr. Emerson's claim of being placed on a '24-hour no-fly list,' and can confirm that such a list does not exist within the TSA."

Also, wherever you're going, have a kick-bass time, and avoid the crappie airline food as much as you can.

How would the TSA know after checkin. All they see is the idea and the BP for a flight to DC or wherever his connection took off from.

How would the TSA know after checkin. All they see is the idea and the BP for a flight to DC or wherever his connection took off from.Unless he volunteered the information during the 'chat-down'. :mad:

The moral is.... well, you know.

Something is missing from the story here. TSA doesn't question people about foreign countries' entry requirements. Did TSA refuse to let him fly? Or was he running late and when he was selected for additional screening he missed his flight?

I think the questioning was more about why the one way ticket, etc. My impression is that the visa issue was not raised until the rebooking process began. That being said, I bet the student gave too much information when chatting with the document checker or whomever he came into contact with.

What the He** was TSA at MSP doing asking questions like this anyway? (Even accounting for bad reporting and mis-identification of parties by the media, there's no other government agency that could have contacted Emerson at MSP like that unless he had been flagged by federal LEOs and they sent one for him specifically.)

Emerson was traveling on a *domestic* flight to Washington, presumably IAD. And I'll stereotype a bit based on the name, the college, and 30 seconds on facebook, and assume that "Jeff Emerson" is a white native-born US citizen. The article and everyone here seems to be missing the point that the issue is TSA acting way out of scope, not airline policy.

This case is a perfect example of why one should never play the 20 questions game with TSA and why one should never show TSA any onward boarding pass, especially an international one.

The kid's "mistake" was probably being too enthusiastic about what may have been his first overseas trip, probably using his passport as ID and taking the occasion to boast to the TDC about where he was going. Any smart East German would have not volunteered such information to the authorities, and it seems Americans have to learn the same lesson. :(

Question: Does MSP use boarding pass scanners at the TDC? Is it possible that the SecureFlight information (which would include destination and might note a 1-way ticket) is being processed and then a flag sent to the scanners about who to question at TDC? That would be a substantial and disturbing development if so.

More information was posted by the student's brother:

"I'm Jeff's brother and have a few additions to clarify the story. Jeff is an extremely travelled individual for his age, having made multiple prior trips to Europe and Africa (including Tanzania). He has a US passport and had the required visa for Tanzania. He is a well-dressed typical college student from rural Iowa. He was doing volunteer work for a school-sponsored program, which paid for his transportation to get there and left Jeff with few choices on how it was purchased. Jeff wanted to spend a few weeks vacationing in Europe after his time in Tanzania, but his school would not pay for his vacation travel. Therefore, the school bought the one-way ticket to Tanzania and Jeff bought a separate ticket leaving Tanzania to go to Europe, then eventually back home. He showed up to the airport hours before his flight, with plenty of documentation showing his summer plans. Somehow, the TSA had prior knowledge of his unusual itenerary and met him at the check-in counter for questioning. The TSA agent told him that they would need to further investigate his plans and he would have to wait atleast 24 hours to check back to see if he was cleared to fly."

My guess is that the airline flagged him for secondary screening because it was a one way ticket. So his boarding pass had the secondary screening codes printed or scribbled on it. Then something went wrong with TSA during that process.

More information was posted by the student's brother:(snip)I don't see that this clarifies anything.

Assuming he's correct in stating the problem started at check-in and not with the TDC (as I postulated), then I don't see the TSA's involvement at all. The 'agent' was perhaps mis-identified, being in fact an airline employee alerted by an (apparently) missing Ethiopian visa or something, but I still don't understand how that would come into play on the MSP-IAD segment.

:confused:

If the kid got the wrong end of the stick or misconstrued the explanation(s), we'll probably never know exactly what happened. Don't think it was a TSA 24-hour NFL thing at all though.

Assuming he's correct in stating the problem started at check-in and not with the TDC (as I postulated), then I don't see the TSA's involvement at all. The 'agent' was perhaps mis-identified, being in fact an airline employee alerted by an (apparently) missing Ethiopian visa or something, but I still don't understand how that would come into play on the MSP-IAD segment.

It's not unheard of, at least anecdotally, for the TSA to approach someone at the check-in counter, even though their jurisdiction ends at the checkpoint line. Who else would take issue with the student flying out to Africa on a one-way ticket? Customs wouldn't care. The FBI, maybe, but they've got bigger fish to fry and don't typically have agents stationed at airports.

My vote is still that it was an FSD or AFSD who grabbed the student and fed him the BS "24-hour" line.

Who else would take issue with the student flying out to Africa on a one-way ticket?The airline. If a passenger is inadmissible at destination, the airline is required to repatriate FOC.

Like I said, I don't know why this would come up at MSP instead of IAD.

The airline. If a passenger is inadmissible at destination, the airline is required to repatriate FOC.

Like I said, I don't know why this would come up at MSP instead of IAD.

A quirk of US policy.

I frequently fly domestic-domestic-international itineraries, with a change plane at my domestic connection. If I'm on a single international PNR, I am always required to show my passport to the airline before boarding my first domestic-domestic flight - even though it will get checked again before I board my connecting international flight - and even though on one occasion, the international flight was cancelled and I ended up returning home without ever leaving the country.

If I've checked in at home and I'm travelling without a bag, I get paged to the gate counter to provide the passport prior to boarding.

IME, he wouldn't have been able to board the domestic flight without showing his passport.

Normal DL procedure for domestic flights connecting to international at check in/bag drop is to verify documents, including visas, and then generate a boarding pass indicating that it is international and documents have been verified. IIRC this prints on the domestic boarding pass as well as the one for an international flight. (Doing OLCI, if allowed for your itinerary which should not if a visa is required, generates a message that you must show passport to a DL agent or feed it into a kiosk an hour before the flight, although I don't think the hour deadline is enforced.) So I think any boarding pass the student would have shown to the TSA document checker would indicate international travel. However, I've never been questioned at MSP when I had a domestic to international connection and it's never been obvious to me that TSA even noticed that I was going overseas. TSA at MSP does have the machines to read boarding passes, at least in the lines for DL elites and PreCheck.

ADDED. On my last domestic to international exMSP flight, I even joked a bit to the PreCheck document checker that I knew why I didn't get the wonderful PreCheck flashing lights because I was continuing to international. TSA wasn't interested in me or my destination.

It sounds to me like the itinerary got SSSS. Does this mean additional questioning or just a more thorough search of carry on items and a pat down? Maybe the student was too friendly during the SSSS and volunteered information that wasn't asked. I wonder whether some of this could have been avoided by linking the return itineraries to the outbound ticket, although it sounds like he had the documents for his return tickets with him.

Does going on an international one way trip make one's itinerary coded as a security issue? I have been flying on one way trips to and from Europe and have not been flagged for any additional security. Is this because Africa was the destination?

I could see the airline not allowing the student to fly if he did not meet the visa requirements, but it does not make sense how this would put him on a 24 hour list.

Does going on an international one way trip make one's itinerary coded as a security issue? I have been flying on one way trips to and from Europe and have not been flagged for any additional security. Is this because Africa was the destination?

I could see the airline not allowing the student to fly if he did not meet the visa requirements, but it does not make sense how this would put him on a 24 hour list.
I suspect one-way in general sets off flags.

I don't think it was Africa, I susepct it was the country and flying pattern. I can see some list out there saying Ethiopia, Somalia and Yemen are "on the list", while Kenya, Tanzania and South Africa aren't.

For someone who is supposed to have flown so many times, to so many continents, I suspect he talked his way out of getting through screening. What's absurd, if true, is that he got all of this treatment, even with the level of documentation he had with him (travel plans while there, return trip scheduled, etc).

My guess is that this was not TSA, this was FBI/JTTF and that the story is a little bungled as to who did the interviewing. A young US Citizen traveling on a oneway ticket paid for by a third party to scary-brown-people-terror-land sets off alarm bells. I'd love to know what the person or people who interviewed the traveler was wearing and any credentials presented or representations made as to agency. The person or people he spoke to were most likely not with the TSA and most likely had authority to make nominations to the TSC. The 'alarm bells' I described above don't ring in the TSA breakroom. This was not the result of a chance encounter with a BDO-- they were there in advance ready for him with information about his travel and then told him they needed time to check out his story.

I believe that this citizen was intentionally blacklisted from travel to a certain destination (or possibly travel at all) by his own government until he provided them with an explanation of his reason for traveling there, and until he gave them time to decide if they were satisfied with that explanation. They only asked for 24 hours in this case.

Nothing about this story adds up.

Who else would take issue with the student flying out to Africa on a one-way ticket? Customs wouldn't care. The FBI, maybe, but they've got bigger fish to fry and don't typically have agents stationed at airports.

CBP, and they do do this at MSP, along with DEA. It's quite likely the Agent flagged it at check-in, called CBP/DEA, and they're the ones who met Jeffrey.

I don't see that this clarifies anything.

Assuming he's correct in stating the problem started at check-in and not with the TDC (as I postulated), then I don't see the TSA's involvement at all. The 'agent' was perhaps mis-identified, being in fact an airline employee alerted by an (apparently) missing Ethiopian visa or something, but I still don't understand how that would come into play on the MSP-IAD segment.

:confused:

If the kid got the wrong end of the stick or misconstrued the explanation(s), we'll probably never know exactly what happened. Don't think it was a TSA 24-hour NFL thing at all though.
If considered blacklisted (by the government), TSA may be called over to check-in counters in anticipation of other federal government employees responding with an over-the-phone clear or in-person before the person can be checked in for the flight.

CBP, and they do do this at MSP, along with DEA. It's quite likely the Agent flagged it at check-in, called CBP/DEA, and they're the ones who met Jeffrey.

I have seen the FBI show up at MSP when DEA was certainly not in the picture and CBP weren't relevant to the trips even as they are obviously staffing MSP.

I have seen the FBI show up at MSP when DEA was certainly not in the picture and CBP weren't relevant to the trips even as they are obviously staffing MSP.

I was merely commenting that they both are on-site at MSP, and I've seen both in action in response to the airlines calling them at check-in...

I was merely commenting that they both are on-site at MSP, and I've seen both in action in response to the airlines calling them at check-in...

Sure, but I don't know why anyone thinks it likely that this was the result of a check-in agent's own suspicions. Lots of people fly from MSP to Africa on one-way tickets and this kind of outcome is not generally representative of what takes place at MSP when flying one-way tickets to Ethiopia, Tanzania or Kenya.

I can tell you exactly what happened:

It states clearly in the blog post that Ethiopia requires proof on onward transit for this kid's visa. Since he had a one-way ticket, the itinerary was flagged, and he was told at check in that the airline would not allow him to travel that day, as he had no such proof. He eventually convinced the airline to let him try again "tomorrow", and contacted Ethiopian the next day, when they told him that he had to bring proof of onward transit, and pay a change fee per their rules.

So, instead of owning up to his mistake, the self-entitled brat concocted a story about how TSA stopped him from flying and that the airline should compensate him.

It states clearly in the blog post that Ethiopia requires proof on onward transit for this kid's visa. Since he had a one-way ticket, the itinerary was flagged, and he was told at check in that the airline would not allow him to travel that day, as he had no such proof.

in the OP

Through Orbitz, he’d booked a one-way ticket from Minneapolis to Tanzania via United Airlines and Ethiopian Airlines.

So how exactly a ticket to Tanzania is not a proof of onward transit in Ethiopia?

I can tell you exactly what happened:


Unless someone is working for a relevant government agency or a contractor and violating some applicable rules and practices when it comes to such matters, rather surprising that anyone here would know exactly what happened.

I think this college kid was a victim of a power tripping screener.

" “Even though my passport is legitimate and my answers proved to be the truth, the agent could not remove me from a 24-hour no-fly list with the TSA,” Emerson says..." (emphasis mine)

There is no such thing. The "No Fly list" is not something you pop onto or off of, once on it you have to make an application to be taken off. There is no such thing as a "24 hour No Fly list".

One can be denied access to the sterile area for many reasons, where you are going is not one of them. As usual, there is more to this story than we are being told, specifically the part that got him denied by either the airline, the TSA, or local LEO's. Find out what that part of the story is and then you will have enough information to form an opinion.

Or, you can just blame the TSA, after all that is the norm here isn't it.:rolleyes:

Or, you can just blame the TSA, after all that is the norm here isn't it.:rolleyes:

If the TSA would quit giving us reasons...@:-)

The "No Fly list" is not something you pop onto or off of, once on it you have to make an application to be taken off. There is no such thing as a "24 hour No Fly list".

That is false. The government has had some people blacklisted for 24-hours or less and then removed the persons without any application to be taken off being made by the blacklisted.

Familiar with the art of governmental blacklisting of non-criminals in order to: blackmail non-criminals into hunting for, or fabricating, criminals; or railroad non-criminals into becoming criminals as the government wants it. ;)

If the TSA would quit giving us reasons...@:-)

Yup... I'll quit blaming the TSA when they quit fornicating with waterfowl on a weekly basis.

I can tell you exactly what happened:

It states clearly in the blog post that Ethiopia requires proof on onward transit for this kid's visa. Since he had a one-way ticket, the itinerary was flagged, and he was told at check in that the airline would not allow him to travel that day, as he had no such proof. He eventually convinced the airline to let him try again "tomorrow", and contacted Ethiopian the next day, when they told him that he had to bring proof of onward transit, and pay a change fee per their rules.

So, instead of owning up to his mistake, the self-entitled brat concocted a story about how TSA stopped him from flying and that the airline should compensate him.

That is not remotely what happened-- that is evident from the article.

There is no such thing. The "No Fly list" is not something you pop onto or off of, once on it you have to make an application to be taken off. There is no such thing as a "24 hour No Fly list".

You don't have to make an application to be taken off the NFL, you can just be taken off by nomination. And, yes, you can pop on and off the list, especially if you are suspected to be a threat, are interviewed, and then determined not to be a threat. It is possible to be on the list for 24 hours, though we don't know exactly what the case is here.

One can be denied access to the sterile area for many reasons, where you are going is not one of them. As usual, there is more to this story than we are being told, specifically the part that got him denied by either the airline, the TSA, or local LEO's. Find out what that part of the story is and then you will have enough information to form an opinion.

Or, you can just blame the TSA, after all that is the norm here isn't it.:rolleyes:

The TSA wasn't party to this-- this was all TSC/FBI/JTTF.

Or, you can just blame the TSA, after all that is the norm here isn't it.:rolleyes:In fact it was the subject/victim (well, his brother maybe) who blamed the TSA.

The norm appears to be that any time some ***** at an airport stops a passenger from flying, the passenger assumes it is the TSA even when it isn't. But, but that's not fair, waaah!

Karma's a b**** ain't it Ron ?

That is false. The government has had some people blacklisted for 24-hours or less and then removed the persons without any application to be taken off being made by the blacklisted.

Incorrect.

If you are on the "No Fly" list then you are on it, period. Getting taken off is a major endeavor and can take months. It is possible to get a “One Time Waver”, but those are rare and you remain on the list even after the flight. Google it, there are several examples of news articles where this has happened.

If the TSA would quit giving us reasons...@:-)

Most here don't need TSA to give them a reason, simply because their belief's are unreasonable. Irrational as well, but that's a different post entirely.

Facts on the other hand, are a very rare thing here.

If you are on the "No Fly" list then you are on it, period. Getting taken off is a major endeavor and can take months.

Actually, you are incorrect. Getting off the list through the TRIP process takes months (actually, it usually doesn't work); getting off the list as the result of an interview initiated by the FBI can easily happen within 24 hours. The TSC can do whatever it pleases-- they can add someone and remove him 24 hours later if they like. That doesn't mean it happens a whole lot, but the sequence of events here was more in the FBI/TSC realm than the TSA.

Facts on the other hand, are a very rare thing here.

Indeed, facts are rare occurence in a TSORon post.

Most here don't need TSA to give them a reason, simply because their belief's are unreasonable. Irrational as well, but that's a different post entirely.

Facts on the other hand, are a very rare thing here.

Look, I'm not even going to pretend that I agree with much of anything you say. I've seen (and been a part of) so many TSA interactions that range between "unpleasant" and "abusive" that, honestly, no claim is too wild for me at this point. Why is it that video of the incident can never be found when the TSA is being challenged, but when a passenger is, the video is readily available? Why did the TSA make thinly-veiled threats to news media after a blogger--who would have been given minimal credibility by the mainstream press anyway--claimed to have found a way to defeat the scanners? And why does the TSA continue to refuse to allow any independent testing of backscatter boxes, or at least allow the employees manning them to wear dosimeters? I can't think of another job in the country where people exposed to a not-insignificant dosage of radiation on a daily basis are not forced to wear dosimeters.

So, no, I don't believe there's any such thing as a "24-hour no-fly-list", and this incident may well have been CBP/FBI/TSC/airline-driven. Thing is, even though I know there's no "24-hour" list, hearing someone say that a TSA told them that was the reason they couldn't fly today isn't even surprising--it's fully believable.

Incorrect.

If you are on the "No Fly" list then you are on it, period. Getting taken off is a major endeavor and can take months. It is possible to get a “One Time Waver”, but those are rare and you remain on the list even after the flight. Google it, there are several examples of news articles where this has happened.

Getting off the NFL permanently can also take place well within 24-hours, without any "one time waiver".

The post of mine (which was quoted by you above) is correct in its entirety. What is incorrect is your assertion of my post being "incorrect" despite it being factually correct.

By the way, this incident at MSP would not have been likely to have been all that it was in the years before the TSA was created; and what the TSA has done is the kind of thing that enabled this situation at MSP to be what it was.

If the TSA were aborted before the fall of 2001, no TSA involvement would be a given; however, TSA wasn't aborted when it should have been, so no surprise the TSA is part of the picture in this incident at MSP. ;)

If the TSA were aborted before the fall of 2001, no TSA involvement would be a given; however, TSA wasn't aborted when it should have been, so no surprise the TSA is part of the picture in this incident at MSP. ;)

You think it was the TSA and not FB/JTTF/TSC who initiated this interview?

You think it was the TSA and not FB/JTTF/TSC who initiated this interview?

Certainly not that, but DHS/TSA requirements for airlines' surrendering of solicited passenger info has made life more active for people:-: in the FBI/JTTF/TSC than would otherwise be the case, particularly on domestic segments of a trip -- it has also made things more active for check-in agents for the airlines.

That is not remotely what happened-- that is evident from the article.

It's not an article; it's a blog post.

It's not an article; it's a blog post.

I understand your point underlying the above. That said, an article from a blog is still an article even as it may: not necessarily be an article in a print publication; not be affiliated with publishers with a history of or interest in using printers to serve subscribers or newsstand purchasers.

You forgot "out of an abundance of caution, we suggested he relax for a day before continuing his travels".

I think it has been proven in many studies that the impulses that cause people to become terrorists only last for 18-24 hours, so preventing him from flying for 24hours would insure those impulses are out of his system.

If I remember correctly it is the liver that metabolizes terrorism from your body, so just like alcohol it takes a while to be purged from your body.