Well, federal statutes must be constitutional, that's all I'm saying.

As for the Fourth Amendment and airports: this has all been discussed in detail elsewhere in this forum, but airport checkpoints are designated administrative search areas where by entering you're deemed to have agreed to the kind of search-without-probable cause you don't have to undergo in other public areas. (In other words, you have to put your bags on the belt even though you've done nothing to suggest you're a terrorist.) That in itself is extra-constitutional, but we've long accepted it. The question now is whether peering inside your underwear, stroking your sex organs, etc. coupled with threats of arrest or large fines if you demur or even simply try to exist the process can also qualify as reasonable "administrative search." Betting is that it certainly does not, especially as so many TSOs have conceded the patdowns serve no security function -- they are performed simply to cause psychological violence to the subject.

In other words, we know the checkpoint is a zone where constitutional strictures against "unreasonable search and seizure" don't apply. Now we're just seeing whether the government really can stroke your junk while threatening to arrest you if you don't stand still for it, all without probably cause. Wrong? Perverse? Inherently un-American? Yes, yes, yes. We're going to find out if that matters.