Originally Posted by sxpsxpsxp
My understanding is that the justification for all the security searches, and certainly for any type of a lie-detector type machine when entering an airport is that you are submitting to such searches voluntarily. No one in the government is forcing you to go to the airport and go through the security checkpoint. If you don't like what they do, you don't have to enter the checkpoint -- just leave.
Yes, I think that may well be the legal justification that the government lawyers would try to use.
That just shows how morally bankrupt and unAmerican this "implied consent" / "you submitted voluntarily" line of reasoning is.
Any legal argument that can countenance mandatory lie detector tests for everyone going through an airport security checkpoint is completely nuts. But then, sometimes "the law is an ...". I wouldn't put it past the Supremes to roll over and let the TSA get away even something as egregiously authoritarian as this.
On the other hand ther was recently a case where someone had entered the checkpiont, the screeing process started, and then the person decided he didn't want to continue with the screening and wanted to leave. The TSA wouldn't let the person leave, and a judge upheld that decision saying that once you've started, there's no going back.
A very interesting point! That's chilling. You point out a disturbing consequence of that prior decision, but I don't see any flaw in your logic. Distressing.