Originally Posted by
RichardKenner
I've never heard that the consent argument based on the CofC. To me, it's based on the understanding that if you're approaching a checkpoint, you'll be searched. This is the case not only at airports, but at Government buildings which have checkpoints.
Tkey argued earlier in the thread that by purchasing a ticket and agreeing to the CofC passengers consented. I should have made it clearer that I was responding to:
Every airline's CoC explicitly states that you will not be carried if you don't comply with the screening process.
Originally Posted by
tkey75
And yet the contract exists.
You're not required to read any contract.
Would you really be surprised to have your airline tell you they refuse to transport you if you refused, say, a gate search?
The TSO considers enhanced pat downs to be reasonable. If you don't, there's a legal system for that.
You're not required to
read any contract. But you have to agree to the contract. For example, when I signed up for itunes, I had to click that I accepted the terms. And when Apple changes the contract terms, they provide a copy of the terms, and I have to click that I've read them. I highly doubt many people actually read all those long terms of usage, but they were clearly provided in a way that airlines CofC are not. In any event, the CofC is not easily readable given its length and use of all caps.
That the TSA considers the primary screening choice of a bodyscan or an enhanced patdown reasonable does not make it so.