FlyerTalk Forums - View Single Post - Why is CLEAR legal?
View Single Post
Old Apr 30, 2023 | 3:11 pm
  #1  
seattlebruce
10 Countries Visited
20 Countries Visited
30 Countries Visited
15 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SEA
Posts: 152
Why is CLEAR legal?

(I'm starting a new thread rather than adding this to the CLEAR consolidated thread because the latter is focused on practical use of CLEAR. If the admins want to move this to that, fine.)

Why does TSA allow CLEAR to exist?

CLEAR, of course, is not a TSA program, but is a private company that pays airports to allow it to take over the first part of the security process, which is verifying the traveler's identity. The traveler then gets to cut to the front of the ID-checking line, where they go through the same screening process as everyone else (either regular or Precheck if they have Precheck).

I think TSA's rationale is that they control screening but the airports control who gets access to the screening in what order. So if the airport wants to let CLEAR members go first (because CLEAR pays them), or wants to let first class passengers go first (do the airlines pay for this?), that's not TSA's concern. But why is this true? Couldn't -- and shouldn't -- the federal government say that all members of the public have an equal right to its services, as long as there is no legitimate difference between people's risks or needs?

The critical difference between CLEAR and Precheck is that Precheck involves background checks so the screening process is faster, easier for the passenger, and cheaper for the government. CLEAR is none of these things, just a line-cutting service. There is no legitimate difference between the security risks or needs posed by CLEAR and non-CLEAR passengers, so why should one get screening priority?

I understand why airports allow CLEAR: they get paid for merely allowing CLEAR to operate. But why does TSA allow it? In particular, why does TSA allow a private company to take over the identity-verification process, and to determine which members of the public get access to their services first? Couldn't they tell airports that neither of these things is allowed? Of course Congress could stop it but that seems unlikely -- but could a lawsuit? Has there been any political or legal opposition to CLEAR? I can't find any.

(As a practical matter, I find CLEAR overpriced for the value it provides. But I'm also offended on principle, and that's the focus of this post. I'm not looking for opinions on whether you find CLEAR helpful, but why a private line-cutting service is allowed to exist.)
seattlebruce is offline