Originally Posted by
Firebug4
They can have it both ways. I don't know how a TSA checkpoint will play out but I am aware of the concept in other circumstances. It is call concurrent jurisdiction. For instance, If drugs are found by US Customs officer in someone possession in the Federal Inspection Area the US Attorney gets first crack. If the US Attorney doesn't want to prosecute it goes down the food chain. State gets it next if they don't want it county gets a shot then city. It the US attorney does it, it is in Federal court. If the others do it, it is in their respective courts. Just because something is Federal property doesn't mean local law enforcement doesn't share jurisdiction. Many times it just depends on circumstances concerning who actually handles what.
FB
Sounds like you provided justification for Arizona to enforce its immigration law.
Originally Posted by
SATTSO
Are you suggesting everyone has to read and understand the constitution the same?
TSA's lawyers haven't given any indication that they've read the constitution, let alone understand it.
Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Jun 16, 2010 at 1:10 pm
Reason: merge consecutive posts