Originally Posted by
Trollkiller
Do you know what a large stack of cash looks like on an x-ray? Could it look like a dense mass that would mimic what an explosive would look like? If it does that gives the TSO the legal right to check for explosives. Once the TSO sees the wad of cash, that is suspicious by its amount, he has the right to refer to a LEO without a 4th Amendment violation. In fact the TSO is mandated by the SOP to do so. Failing to refer to a LEO would be dereliction of duty.
Regardless of what the TSA may believe, SSI and secret directives do not usurp law. If the TSA has other charges there should be a law that allows it. You need to find the statutory law or case law that limits the TSA at the airport to one charge when dealing with passengers and/or the sterile area. Failing that and the Devil wins.
The TSA does have more than one charge as it is over all of transportation security and an allowance that is made in one area of transportation may allow allowances made at the airport. (non Devil's Advocate comment: I honestly don't know if it would)
The Devil gets to win by default if the Devil is the authority perceived to be in charge. The Angels must bind the Devil by making him submit to the will of God.
In this case God would be the Constitution and the Bible is the statutory laws. To beat this Devil you need to learn your scripture.
p.s. Being the Devil's Advocate is hard. (please feel sorry for me)
It still seems like whack-a-mole if the devil's advocation isn't more than fluffy assertions of how TSA does things. An effective devil's advocate should quote the scripture that makes the devil's case. Else, you're just sniping and telling people they don't have the rights they think they have. I did try to cut you a little slack in granting you your administrative search based on the stuff your angelic aspect cited several times and the work that Radio Girl eventually did for you.
As for a limitation, How about
United States v Davis: "...screening of passengers and of the articles that will be accessible to them in flight does not exceed constitutional limitations provided that the screening process is no more extensive nor intensive than necessary, in the light of current technology, to detect the presence of weapons or explosives, that it is confined in good faith to that purpose, ..."
If TSA don't confine itself in good faith to that purpose, it exceeds constitutional limitations and the search is unreasonable under the 4th amendment. Why does TSA have a right to search and examine each bill to count how much money is there, interrogate the passenger about how they may have come by it, or detain the passenger on the behalf of a real LEO?
Your assertion of an SSI SOP is no more authoritative than TSOReedWilliams' assertion of the SSI SOP that forces him to act as the unbound hands of the LEO.