While I am not excusing what the TSO and the airport police did, I feel that I need to point out the obvious -- that if the C4L activist had simply answered the screener's question about the cash, no escalation would have ocurred.

Again, it was the refusal by Bierfeldt to answer a question that caused the screener to think in his mind that the money was related to some type of illegal activity, because if it was not, then why would the traveler not answer the question? Thus, given that he had suspicions that the money was related to an illegal activity, calling in the airport police was a logical response.

Now, it was the right of Bierfieldt to refuse the answer the questions. The question that needs answering is: is refusal to answer questions posed by TSOs in the absence of something obvioiusly illegal being found, like a gun or drugs, sufficient grounds for the TSOs to escalate the issue?

I can also understand why the TSA might be reluctant to provide detailed specifics on what TSOs are and are not allowed to ask and do and what they are not, i.e., the rules of engagement. Providing this information would better enable criminals and terrorists to game the system.

Now, again, I want to state that clearly Bierfeldt had the absolute right to act in the way he did. The problem with taking the Fifth, however, is that people naturally assume that people have a reason why they are taking the Fifth, i.e., that they are guilty of something. Juries are instructed to disregard this at trials during their deliberations, but are TSOs required to also disregard this? I don't know.

Perhaps since boarding an aircraft is something that is done voluntarily, people should expect to have a reduced right to privacy during the process of so doing. While freedom of movement is, I am sure, something that could be logically assumed from the Freedom of Assembly clause in the First Amendment, as well as being an obvious basic human right, might a person who is in the process of preparing to board an aircraft be, by so doing, also voluntairly waiving a portion of those rights?