Originally Posted by Ari
It would be clear from the facts that the passenger was detained for excercising his first-amendment right. What a TSO did or didn't say has no bearing-- the (documentable) fact that he was detained with illegal cause is a clear violation-- I don't see what you're getting at here.
The fact that it's difficult and expensive to prove constitutional rights cases, unless the ACLU thinks this one really has something going for it.