Originally Posted by
RichardKenner
Careful! That opinion talks about "consent" in the legal sense of whether evidence so obtained can be used against the person being search. From my reading of that decision, any claim that it can be used to force a person to actually submit to the search is false. I don't think there is any case law on that point.
Hmmm...
The judge certainly elaborates that his motivation for the decision is that he doesn't want a terrorist to be able to opt out if TSA is about to find his bomb, and then come back another day and try again.
How does the content of the Aukai decision leave you the option to 'quit' in the middle of a screening, assuming the search is otherwise reasonable and legal?
I've always assumed if a search was "reasonable" and legally authorized, you pretty much have to endure it.
But that does raise the question: In general, what power does any government agent have to force you to submit to a search? For example, if you roll through a sobriety checkpoint and refuse to stop and roll down your window, how do the police force you to submit? To what penalties would you be subject?
My guess is that a law enforcement officer has the power (arrest, physical force, etc) to make you submit to the search. But TSA does not have that power. So I assume they would have to call a local police officer and they could force you to submit. Or TSA can threaten you with civil fines.
Am I anywhere near the right track?