Originally Posted by
Boggie Dog
What I think the OD means is not important.
What is important is that TSO's have been instructed to involve a LEO if they find certain things. $10,000+ is one of those. Apparently $4,700 does it also.
Now I do believe that referral to a LEO for doing something that is perfectly legal exceeds the limited Administrative Search for Weapons, Explosives and Incendiaries that TSA is authorized to conduct.
When they exceed the scope of their Administrative Search they are violating the law and should be held accountable for that action.
As far as the meaning of the OD, seems very clear to me. Just read it for what it is without trying to further define the language.
I've always argued that the Bierfeldt case is a horrible example to use in the fight against TSA. I just don't see his argument as being reasonable. Regardless of how you feel about TSA investigating the money, Bierfeldt's demeanor muddies the waters significantly. Had he simply played along and captured the recording, this would be a much easier case. Now, the TSA can say something like "We did not allow him past the checkpoint because he failed to cooperate with the screening process. He was allowed to proceed once the FBI determined that they had no interest in investigating the matter further." Or something along those lines. Just my opinion.