Originally Posted by
vasantn
I searched, I really did, but I couldn't find the answer. Since the name game now seems to have made it to JFK, my question is (and again, I'm sure it's been answered many times): What are the consequences if I refuse to say my name out loud and say "It's right there on my boarding pass and my ID"?
I have had decent luck by saying that "I plead the Fifth Amendment." If the supervisor (who inevitably gets called over) needs clarification, I explain that I refuse to answer incriminating questions from government agents who are trying to gather evidence against me. If I give the wrong answer to the question, that would be used as evidence against me, therefore I cannot be compelled to answer it.
Originally Posted by
goalie
Simply put, you are not required to state your name and cannot be denied entry to the secure area if you do and you are not interfering with the screening process-no matter what the TSA says.
Simply show them a copy of this:
CFR 1540.107
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/1540.107
We do this by presenting our I/D and BP
and specifically noted in subsection b1 and c
(c) An individual may not enter a sterile area or board an aircraft if the individual does not present a verifying identity document as defined in § 1560.3 of this chapter
Wait!! How does this square with
Gilmore?
Gilmore also suggests that the identification policy did not present a meaningful choice, but rather a "Hobson's Choice," in violation of the unconstitutional conditions doctrine. We have held, as a matter of constitutional law, that an airline passenger has a choice regarding searches:
[H]e may submit to a search of his person and immediate possessions as a condition to boarding; or he may turn around and leave. If he chooses to proceed, that choice, whether viewed as a relinquishment of an option to leave or an election to submit to the search, is essentially a "consent," granting the government a license to do what it would otherwise be barred from doing by the Fourth Amendment.
Davis, 482 F.2d at 913. Gilmore had a meaningful choice. He could have presented identification, submitted to a search, or left the airport. That he chose the latter does not detract from the fact that he could have boarded the airplane had he chosen one of the other two options. Thus, we reject Gilmore's Fourth Amendment arguments.
If there is no option to board the plane without showing ID, then wouldn't the decision in this case be irrelevant/overturned? It seems like
this resurrected old thread may be more relevant than I thought...
ETA: The full text of
goalie's CFR is
(c) An individual may not enter a sterile area or board an aircraft if the individual does not present a verifying identity document as defined in § 1560.3 of this chapter, when requested for purposes of watch list matching under § 1560.105(c), unless otherwise authorized by TSA on a case-by-case basis.
But I would argue that the 'authorized by TSA on a case-by-case basis' would violate due process, since there is no clarity on when you will be admitted or denied entry sans ID.