|
Flyertalker files suit against TSA [merged threads]
Sorry if this has been posted, but I've looked around and don't see it mentioned.
A businessman in MIA has apparently filed suit to stop both the NoS and the sexual assault. He isn't seeking monetary damages, but here's what he wants (in part): Permanent injunctive relief requiring the Defendant to discontinue the requirement that "ordinary air passengers" submit to searches that involve nude body scanners or pat downs that touch genital, buttock, or breast areas, except that nothing herein shall be interpreted as preventing the Defendant from using these methods as optional screening methods or as methods of screening when probable cause or other reasonable suspicion would make it prudent. |
I haven't seen it anywhere so thanks for posting...btw, yet another opportunity to post some retorts to the idiots.
|
Good for him and thanks for passing it on!
|
Your FL businessman happens to be a FlyerTalk member. :)
I've been registered since '04 under a different username (can't remember password and changed e-mail :() and '07 under this username, reading moreso than posting, although for some reason it didn't cross my mind to read FlyerTalk before filing suit. I'm glad (though not suprised!) to see that most of you are quite opposed to the new screening methods, and I hope my suit has some positive impact for all of us. Thanks for the link! --Jon |
One of the liberties that they haven't taken away from us that we can use to push the issue. If people can sue for spilling hot coffee on themselves I think we can flood the courts with suits to stop this madness.
|
So cool Jon! Welcome back and thanks for standing up for pax everywhere.
|
Originally Posted by Affection
(Post 15176673)
I'm glad (though not suprised!) to see that most of you are quite opposed to the new screening methods, and I hope my suit has some positive impact for all of us.
Thanks for the link! --Jon |
Interesting, not entirely factual but interesting.
|
Originally Posted by eyecue
(Post 15177326)
Interesting, not entirely factual but interesting.
|
Excellent!
|
Originally Posted by Affection
(Post 15176673)
Your FL businessman happens to be a FlyerTalk member. :)
I've been registered since '04 under a different username (can't remember password and changed e-mail :() and '07 under this username, reading moreso than posting, although for some reason it didn't cross my mind to read FlyerTalk before filing suit. I'm glad (though not suprised!) to see that most of you are quite opposed to the new screening methods, and I hope my suit has some positive impact for all of us. Thanks for the link! --Jon |
Welcome (back) to FT. ^ Good on you and please keep us posted. ^ ^
|
Awesome! Thanks!
|
lol according to his profile, he works for the TSA, which would explain his comment. ;) But, I'd be interested in hearing what he thinks is inaccurate, if he does legitimately think so. I actually don't expect the government to challenge the facts of my case at all, but rather to try and find a technicality or try to persuade a jury that it's reasonable for them to be in our pants.
Originally Posted by eyecue
(Post 15177326)
Interesting, not entirely factual but interesting.
|
Excellent on pushing it to reasonable suspicion!
It'll be interesting to see which of the suits gets accepted by SCOTUS. This one seems well balanced (on 1 minute review) and could do well. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:43 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.