Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

Flyer “Processed” (Arrested?) in NM After Declining to Show ID

Flyer “Processed” (Arrested?) in NM After Declining to Show ID

Old Nov 17, 09, 9:05 pm
  #196  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by LoganTSO View Post
I do know that. I just found BD's statement silly because the above factors you are mentioning (minus the TSA ones). He states he doesn't want to present ID to any agent of the government... yet CBP needs to see a passport to complete the entry process. (Albeit that doesn't apply to BD because he's a citizen.)
He said that he didn't want to present his ID to any agent of the government to exercise his right to travel. The purpose of presenting ID to immigration is to prove citizenship status, i.e. the right to re-enter the country. This does not implicate the right to travel. Moreover, the ID check at Immigration serves a specific and valid function: assuring that non-citizens without visas (or not citizens of countries that are admitted without visas) do not enter the country. Finally, you are mistaken: a US Passport is NOT required for a citizen to re-enter the country. It is the easiest way to establish citizenship and the concomitant right of re-entry. However, CBP can and will utilize other means to verify citizenship if, for some reason, e.g. loss, a U.S. citizen cannot present a passport.

Control of US boarders is a reasonable and practical goal. Revenue protection for the airlines, which is the only function of the ID check for domestic flights is not. I am aware that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the right to travel is not implicated by the ID check. I believe they are wrong. Here's why the ID check contributes NOTHING to security:

1. The "No Fly" list does not contain the names of the most dangerous terrorists.

2. Anyone with a copy of Acrobat Professional can alter a boarding pass.

3. Anyone can change their name through a simple court process.

4. Driver's Licenses contain no biometric data, so all that is necessary is to obtain a valid drivers license of someone who resembles a would-be terrorist.

5. The terrorists who have operated on US soil did so under their real names and possessed valid ID.

6. Counterfeit ID is readily obtainable, cheaply and easily, in most major cities with a large population of illegal aliens.

Meanwhile, TSA ignores huge security wholes by, for example, not inspecting all air cargo and not inspecting all U.S. mail, both of which are placed on every commercial flight, failing to adequately investigate and clear airport workers, etc.

Nevertheless, they can hold and question BD as long as they like because of the exceptions to the law provided to CBP.
There are no "exceptions" to the law for CBP. They, just like you, are limited by the Constitution. CBP's procedures must comply with Constitutional limitations on the state's exercise of power . . . just like TSA.

They still have to let him to the country, but nothing stops them from holding and harassing him with an intense grilling from the officer and his superiors.
Nothing stops them from harassing him? Are you kidding? Have you taken high school civics (they called it "social studies" when I was in high school). They may not harass him, nor may they hold him arbitrarily or indefinitely -- the U.S. Constitution forbids the state such powers.
PTravel is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 9:17 pm
  #197  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 16,254
Originally Posted by LoganTSO View Post
I do know that. I just found BD's statement silly because the above factors you are mentioning (minus the TSA ones). He states he doesn't want to present ID to any agent of the government... yet CBP needs to see a passport to complete the entry process. (Albeit that doesn't apply to BD because he's a citizen.)

Nevertheless, they can hold and question BD as long as they like because of the exceptions to the law provided to CBP. They still have to let him to the country, but nothing stops them from holding and harassing him with an intense grilling from the officer and his superiors.



Whine to Fox News, seeing as they jumped on the Bierfeldt thing. Because Infowars is a just a looney-bin.
Would you be ok if you had to present ID to enter a freeway?

The rest of your statement is a good example of why civil rights are getting trampled by government agencies and their employees.
Boggie Dog is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 9:23 pm
  #198  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,387
First, Phil, glad you're out. I do hope you succeed in this case.

Second, ND Sol is completely correct in the following.

Originally Posted by ND Sol View Post
But the ALJ is not only an employee of the executive branch, he is also an employee of the Coast Guard, which is within the same agency as the TSA is - DHS. So not quite the independence that one would like.

Not only that, but the ALJ hearing your case will be near the place where the incident occurred, which could be thousands of miles from your home. According to anecdotal evidence, the TSA threatens that the fine will increase if you go to the ALJ. In addition, the burden of proof is much lower only requiring a preponderance of the evidence.
That is one reason that agencies like the TSA prefer to do things as "rules" rather than having them in the USC. It is much, much harder to challenge a "rule violation" because you first have to contest it, then appeal to an ALJ that is part of the agency, then, presumably, you can take it to court. It took many years before the Janet Jackson nipple ring incident ever ended up in a courtroom.

Finally, I keep watching this case to see if there is any applicability to any of the TSAs actions, especially when they enlist local LE as their henchmen: http://volokh.com/2009/11/16/petitio...poration-case/
Global_Hi_Flyer is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 9:34 pm
  #199  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: PHX
Programs: Airline Free Agent, Bonvoy Titanium
Posts: 3,494
Good luck Phil! Hope the best on this case. ^
Jimgotkp is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 9:36 pm
  #200  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by LoganTSO View Post
Whine to Fox News, seeing as they jumped on the Bierfeldt thing. Because Infowars is a just a looney-bin.
Great idea.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 9:38 pm
  #201  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Programs: PC Pl, UA 1K, CC Gl
Posts: 2,204
Originally Posted by PTravel View Post
It is the easiest way to establish citizenship and the concomitant right of re-entry. However, CBP can and will utilize other means to verify citizenship if, for some reason, e.g. loss, a U.S. citizen cannot present a passport.
I have a friend, who is a US citizen, that did not have his US passport, just naturalization certificate. 18 month ago, he was traveling from Russia to US and on the stopover in Paris was denied boarding by CO, since he did not have US passport. He spent 2 days in the terminal trying to get a US consul to help him, but after some back and forth they have refused, saying that he never received his passport, so they can not replace it. So, he needs to apply for US passport and wait. he was not allowed to leave airport, since only when you have a US passport you don't need a visa in France (he had his Ukrainian passport on him as dual citizen). After 2 days he turned himself in to french immigration, spent 2 more days in immigration jail, was deported back to Russia (from where he came) and had to apply for US passport there. Couple weeks later he received his US passport and came back to US. So, I guess, they did not utilize any other means, since he had his naturalization certificate, US driver licence and social security card on him. He had to buy a new ticket, BTW, since CO refused to honor the old one (segment from Russia was on Airfrance and was used obviously)

(it was before active use of FT for me, otherwise i would post it here then.)
al613 is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 9:44 pm
  #202  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by al613 View Post
I have a friend, who is a US citizen, that did not have his US passport, just naturalization certificate. 18 month ago, he was traveling from Russia to US and on the stopover in Paris was denied boarding by CO, since he did not have US passport. He spent 2 days in the terminal trying to get a US consul to help him, but after some back and forth they have refused, saying that he never received his passport, so they can not replace it. So, he needs to apply for US passport and wait. he was not allowed to leave airport, since only when you have a US passport you don't need a visa in France (he had his Ukrainian passport on him as dual citizen). After 2 days he turned himself in to french immigration, spent 2 more days in immigration jail, was deported back to Russia (from where he came) and had to apply for US passport there. Couple weeks later he received his US passport and came back to US. So, I guess, they did not utilize any other means, since he had his naturalization certificate, US driver licence and social security card on him. He had to buy a new ticket, BTW, since CO refused to honor the old one (segment from Russia was on Airfrance and was used obviously)

(it was before active use of FT for me, otherwise i would post it here then.)
An unfortunate story, but one that has nothing to do with what I wrote. If you show up at a U.S. border, CBP will eventually admit you (after verifying citizenship). No, the consulate will not help you if you lose your passport overseas, and it is your responsibility to get to a U.S. consulate or embassy to replace it (though I suspect your friend's age was part of the problem -- there are ways to get help from bureaucrats, and ways to ensure that you won't get help). Neither CO nor the French government have anything to do with CBP's admission standards. However, had your friend presented himself at a U.S. border, he would have eventually been admitted.
PTravel is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 9:51 pm
  #203  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,006
Originally Posted by PTravel View Post
Nothing stops them from harassing him? Are you kidding? Have you taken high school civics (they called it "social studies" when I was in high school). They may not harass him, nor may they hold him arbitrarily or indefinitely -- the U.S. Constitution forbids the state such powers.
I don't think that is what he meant or even that he meant holding someone was a good thing.

LoganTSO is right, they can hold you until they can verify your citizenship. Anything more than 10 minutes would be harassment in most of out books.

Your civic's class must have been way back in the day. They called our's "Government" and it very lightly touched on Constitutional rights. Mostly it hinted that the Government GIVES us our rights.
Trollkiller is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 9:59 pm
  #204  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by Trollkiller View Post
I don't think that is what he meant or even that he meant holding someone was a good thing.
I'm really not sure what he meant. Honestly, he seems to have missed the point.

LoganTSO is right, they can hold you until they can verify your citizenship. Anything more than 10 minutes would be harassment in most of out books.
I guess that depends. Once, before my wife became a naturalized citizen and had a green card, we drove from Buffalo to Niagara Falls (very romantic ). We left the U.S. and crossed the bridge to Canada. Canadian Immigration asked if we were both U.S. citizens and my wife answered, truthfully, that she was not. She was asked to produce her green card and that was when we discovered she forgot to bring it. We weren't allowed in to Canada and were turned around to re-cross the bridge back to the U.S. When we got to U.S. Immigration, we explained what happened and, of course, they would not admit my wife back. We were directed to the INS office (this was pre-DHS) and we explained what happened. They were very nice about it and took about 30 minutes to verify her permanent resident status. They then offered us a choice -- we could re-enter the U.S. immediately, or they could give us something that would admit her to Canada and then return, however we'd have to pay a $150 penalty. We opted for the latter (we really wanted to see the Falls) and that's what we did. On our return to the U.S., we stopped again at the INS office at the border, waited about 15 minutes to pay the penalty, and she was re-admitted. The whole process was handled by the INS sympathetically, politely and with good humor.

Was she detained until citizenship (or, in this case, permanent residence) could be verified? Yes. Was she harassed? Not in the least.

Your civic's class must have been way back in the day. They called our's "Government" and it very lightly touched on Constitutional rights. Mostly it hinted that the Government GIVES us our rights.
Oy. My civics class was a long time ago, but my law school education wasn't that long ago. Did they really teach you that the government gives us rights?
PTravel is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 10:17 pm
  #205  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: BOS
Programs: TSA TSO
Posts: 455
Originally Posted by PTravel View Post
I'm really not sure what he meant. Honestly, he seems to have missed the point.

I guess that depends. Once, before my wife became a naturalized citizen and had a green card, we drove from Buffalo to Niagara Falls (very romantic ). We left the U.S. and crossed the bridge to Canada. Canadian Immigration asked if we were both U.S. citizens and my wife answered, truthfully, that she was not. She was asked to produce her green card and that was when we discovered she forgot to bring it. We weren't allowed in to Canada and were turned around to re-cross the bridge back to the U.S. When we got to U.S. Immigration, we explained what happened and, of course, they would not admit my wife back. We were directed to the INS office (this was pre-DHS) and we explained what happened. They were very nice about it and took about 30 minutes to verify her permanent resident status. They then offered us a choice -- we could re-enter the U.S. immediately, or they could give us something that would admit her to Canada and then return, however we'd have to pay a $150 penalty. We opted for the latter (we really wanted to see the Falls) and that's what we did. On our return to the U.S., we stopped again at the INS office at the border, waited about 15 minutes to pay the penalty, and she was re-admitted. The whole process was handled by the INS sympathetically, politely and with good humor.

Was she detained until citizenship (or, in this case, permanent residence) could be verified? Yes. Was she harassed? Not in the least.

Oy. My civics class was a long time ago, but my law school education wasn't that long ago. Did they really teach you that the government gives us rights?
I concede. I guess I've been believing the CBP "horror stories" on the board here too much, combined with the fact the only international travel I've been on was doing the exact same crossing over into Canada back in 2007. Though... on return, the CBP officer was pretty gruff towards us.

Also I made a mental note to not apply as a paralegal under you. (That is provided I stay on that path the way college is looking right now.

Plus, my classes were just history with a bit of civics tossed in here and there.
LoganTSO is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 10:45 pm
  #206  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: American Airlines AAdvantage, Rapids Reward
Posts: 34,244
Originally Posted by FWAAA View Post
Here's a link to Phil's case on the court's website. Trial is set for Feb 5:

http://www.metrocourt.state.nm.us/ca...573709&defno=1

In case the court doesn't allow deep links, here's the front door link (search for "mosack p"):

http://www.metrocourt.state.nm.us/ca....jsp?form=case
I think that he is found not guilty all of his charges. I believe that he will expect to be there at the court on February, 2010. He must to show up at the court on-time. He had returns back to ABQ to goes on the his criminal trial. If he fought with his case and if he will wins the court. If he not guilty all of his charges and the judge will be drop all of his charges. He will be dismissed with his charges.
N830MH is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 11:03 pm
  #207  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by LoganTSO View Post
I concede. I guess I've been believing the CBP "horror stories" on the board here too much, combined with the fact the only international travel I've been on was doing the exact same crossing over into Canada back in 2007. Though... on return, the CBP officer was pretty gruff towards us.
I've had some bad CBP experiences as well. However, that has nothing to do with the fact that showing ID serves an entirely different function when entering into the U.S. than at a domestic ID checkpoint. There are bad CBP officers, just as there are bad police and bad TSOs. LEOs aren't immune from abusing their authority or the Constitution.

Also I made a mental note to not apply as a paralegal under you. (That is provided I stay on that path the way college is looking right now.
That's okay -- I only hire paralegals with experience.

By the way, I like your sig.
PTravel is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 11:04 pm
  #208  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Posts: 36,062
Originally Posted by N830MH View Post
I think that he is found not guilty all of his charges. I believe that he will expect to be there at the court on February, 2010. He must to show up at the court on-time. He had returns back to ABQ to goes on the his criminal trial. If he fought with his case and if he will wins the court. If he not guilty all of his charges and the judge will be drop all of his charges. He will be dismissed with his charges.
And I agree -- that's exactly what will happen, at least based upon the facts that we know right now.
PTravel is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 11:06 pm
  #209  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: American Airlines AAdvantage, Rapids Reward
Posts: 34,244
Originally Posted by PTravel View Post
And I agree -- that's exactly what will happen, at least based upon the facts that we know right now.
Yeah, we will find out sooner or later.
N830MH is offline  
Old Nov 17, 09, 11:26 pm
  #210  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 89,772
Originally Posted by Mr. Mastodon Flyer View Post
Out of curiosity, do other countries require passengers to show picture ID in order to board domestic flights?
Government agents don't require passengers to present government-issued photo ID for domestic air travel in most countries, but the airlines do care about it more often.
GUWonder is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: