Flyer “Processed” (Arrested?) in NM After Declining to Show ID
Nov 17, 2009, 7:26 am
#136
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 376
I would certainly investigate moving charges to federal jurisdiction.
Nov 17, 2009, 7:37 am
#137
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,129
Going back to your Air Force days, did civilian state or local LEO's have the right to enter the base and carry out law enforcement activities on their own authority?
I see a TSA checkpoint in the exact same light, just a much smaller piece of real estate. I could very well be wrong but it seems an interesting point of discussion.
Nov 17, 2009, 7:41 am
#138
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,956
Nov 17, 2009, 7:45 am
#139
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: ATL
Programs: DL, AA
Posts: 6,031
Nov 17, 2009, 7:49 am
#140
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,956
Federal Reservation may not be the proper term but it is clear that control of the checkpoints is by TSA an entity of the federal government. I'm not sure that ownership is a deciding factor either, I seem to remember some military bases that are on land that has long term leases but ownership of the land itself was retained by some other party. Hence TSA rules and federal law should be the controlling factor in the TSA checkpoint boundaries.
Going back to your Air Force days, did civilian state or local LEO's have the right to enter the base and carry out law enforcement activities on their own authority?
I see a TSA checkpoint in the exact same light, just a much smaller piece of real estate. I could very well be wrong but it seems an interesting point of discussion.
Going back to your Air Force days, did civilian state or local LEO's have the right to enter the base and carry out law enforcement activities on their own authority?
I see a TSA checkpoint in the exact same light, just a much smaller piece of real estate. I could very well be wrong but it seems an interesting point of discussion.
Nov 17, 2009, 7:58 am
#142
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: LAX/TPE
Programs: United 1K, JAL Sapphire, SPG Lifetime Platinum, National Executive Elite, Hertz PC, Avis PC
Posts: 42,231
The TSA can levy civil penalties (not quite a 'fine', but close) which you can refuse to pay and then appeal to an Administrative Law Judge. The Judge can dismiss the fine or uphold it - but either way someone outside of the TSA is ruling on the merit of their action.
Nov 17, 2009, 8:07 am
#143
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
I have a UK driving licence, and it is illegal under UK law to ask for or to present a driving licence for any purpose other than verification of current driving privileges, so presuming I show up with no other ID, that would mean TSA was trying to force me to break the law.
Nov 17, 2009, 8:07 am
#144
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
If your attorney says anything publicly, please share it so we can be updated.
Fight the good fight on this. The community's behind you - and not just in spirit.
Nov 17, 2009, 8:09 am
#145
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
As a matter of interest I take it Phil ist trying to get this to court and possibly even to superiour court to "test" the limits of the requirement right?
Did he have to do it this way is there no other way a US court will check what laws or requirments that are passed to see if they conform with the constitution?
Did he have to do it this way is there no other way a US court will check what laws or requirments that are passed to see if they conform with the constitution?
Nov 17, 2009, 8:22 am
#146
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,129
See Post #96. The state can have many LEO functions on land leased or owned by the Feds. We had one part of our Army post that was proprietary, which meant that the local LEO's had jurisdiction. Now that doesn't negate the fact that if two soldiers got in an altercation in that area that the MP's didn't have jurisdiction, but if it was non-military, it was the locals primary responsibility. I would imagine it would be much the same with the checkpoints.
Nov 17, 2009, 8:27 am
#147
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,004
The way the legal system is set up in the US, one has to be injured by a law before it could be challenged. It was designed to prevent people from frivolously challenging laws that they didn't agree with. While it's good at that, it also means if a law should be challenged, someone has to have the stones to be willing to pay the price with what that involves. Hats off to Phil for challenging the law. I hope he consulted with an attorney prior to this to make it an air tight challenge.
My thanks, too, Phil, for your civil disobedience. ^
Nov 17, 2009, 8:42 am
#148
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
As a matter of interest I take it Phil ist trying to get this to court and possibly even to superiour court to "test" the limits of the requirement right?
Did he have to do it this way is there no other way a US court will check what laws or requirments that are passed to see if they conform with the constitution?
Did he have to do it this way is there no other way a US court will check what laws or requirments that are passed to see if they conform with the constitution?
As I understand the system, yes. The American jurisprudence system operates on an adversarial system (here, too). That's why they're calling it a "test case"--such cases are used to challenge laws or policies which are believed to be illegal or unconstitutional, since courts cannot simply review laws at their will.
On top of that, unless I'm mistaken, the judge's decision won't become part of case law (binding precedent) unless it's taken to (or originally heard in) an appellate court.
Nov 17, 2009, 9:08 am
#149
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,956
It is in the granting document or the lease generally. Sometimes, there will be an agreement for lands already owned by the federal gov't for a long time that will allocate jurisdiction. I would believe that if the issue is not addressed in the lease, the jurisdiction remains with the local authority.
Nov 17, 2009, 9:10 am
#150
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CLT
Programs: Choice Hotels/FFOCUS
Posts: 7,256
I haven't read more than the first page of this post, but I thought I'd pop in and say that I was released about an hour ago and am in the lobby of the hotel where my colleague and I are staying, IMing with folks back at CDC. Apparently there's an attorney who's interested and wanted me to call at any hour when I got out, so I'm trying to get into my room to use the phone. All my belongings, save clothes on my back and cash, are still at the ABQ police station.
I'm deeply, deeply, thankful to all the support that's turning up. The Internet paid my bail!
I'm deeply, deeply, thankful to all the support that's turning up. The Internet paid my bail!
;I'm glad you are out/ I left my comments on the blog & will continue to follow.