If screeners would do this to protect security of airline travelers, that would be one thing. However, these screeners were not at this point involved in travel security, but were investigating a crime unrelated to travel. I think that any true aviation security expert would say that only large amounts of cash, absent other factors such as a lack of any bags, is not an indicator of someone intending to commit a terrorist act.

The interesting question is whether the evidence, the cash, will be admissible if defendant files a motion to suppress as a result of a claimed illegal search. I know that Bart, among others, will point out that passengers are deemed to consent to a search of their bags and persons before boarding a plane. However, I think that many courts would place limits on the scope of that type of search, to avoid fishing expeditions. By way of analogy, searches during traffic stops can only be for items within the "wingspan" of the driver and passengers in the car, absent consent. Without consent, the police cannot look for contraband in the trunk that is not immediately accessible. I seem to recall one case where the stopping officer called for a drug-sniffing dog and detained the driver until the canine officer arrived. I do not remember the length of time that passed, but I think that the reviewing court suppressed the evidence. I will have to practice my Westlaw skills to look for this citation and fact pattern.