Originally Posted by
ESpen36
TSA airport security constitutes an "administrative search" to which passengers voluntarily submit in order to fly on commercial aircraft departing from most large U.S. airports. My understanding (admittedly as a non-attorney) is that by choosing to purchase the ticket and enter the sterile area, you are consenting to this "administrative search" limited to the kinds of things that TSA determines could pose a threat to aviation security.
But the limitation must be reasonable and have a nexus to aviation security. Fishing expeditions are not permitted.
But TSA screening is not a full-blown search like LEOs could carry out with a warrant or probable cause. For example, TSA screening does not include searching the electronic files on your laptop, or reading any documents in your wallet except the government-issued photo ID you provide to clear security. These things would fall outside the scope of an "administrative search."
That's not quite correct. The TSA can define the search to be whatever it wants the search to be, provided that they believe a court will hold it to be reasonable to protect aviation security.
I have personally witnessed the TSA going through a person's wallet, inspecting each item (papers and credit cards), and asking questions about each one. They would be hard pressed to justify that in court, I believe, as would they be hard pressed to justify search of electronic files on a laptop. In my experience, and other proven experiences, many TSA personnel ignore those limitations. They DID get slapped down with Bierfeldt, but that hasn't stopped them from looking for large sums of money. There is no nexus to aviation security with large sums of money at the checkpoint.
The same goes for those bag searches at the entrance to museums. Don't like them? Then don't go to museums. Don't like TSA security? Nobody is forcing you to fly on commercial aircraft, or at all. You commit to administrative searches by CHOOSING to engage in certain activities that either the government or some organization has decided to involve security procedures. If you do not wish to consent, you cannot be forced. Just avoid the activities where administrative searches occur.
Correct, within limits. As just shown in the San Diego case, if you do not consent to a search after learning what the search involves, the TSA will try to force the search or fine you by claiming you stopped mid-search. I would agree with your assessment if the TSA were to publicize and specifically indicate the parameters of the search before you start the search process. But they don't do that.
Now, I'm ambivalent on the issue of TSOs' reporting to LEOs when they see items in luggage that are illegal to possess, or legal but highly suspicious and likely associated with unlawful activities, but that do NOT pose a threat to aviation security. For exemple, TSA might notify local LEOs if the screeners see narcotics, Cuban cigars, or unusually large amounts of unexplained cash in your luggage. My opinion is that TSOs are not qualified to evaluate what is suspicious and what is not.....that function should be left to sworn LEOs who have the necessary professional training.
Things that are clearly illegal and are discovered as part of an administrative search, I have no problem with TSA turning over to law enforcement. Things that are legal but might be considered "suspicious" by some (large sums of money, for example) I am absolutely opposed to turning over. I do not owe the TSA or anyone else an explanation of the reason that I might carry a legal item.
As Ron is contending that screeners are trained to determine what is suspicious, I would likewise contend that said statement is prima fascia evidence that TSA is exceeding limits of administrative search. The job of TSA, and the administrative search provisions, are tightly tied to safety of flight. A bundle of cash or a disassembled cellphone is not dangerous to flight, accordingly legal items should not be turned over and there should be no LEO involvement. Not that it would stop someone like Ron that believes that he has the right to lord over everyone and terrorize Americans.