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

Court Reinstates Professor Rahinah Ibrahim's lawsuit over No-Fly List

Court Reinstates Professor Rahinah Ibrahim's lawsuit over No-Fly List

Old Dec 12, 13, 9:25 am
  #61  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by Schmurrr View Post
I accept that government officials may have a different opinion than I do or settle on a different solution than I would, but I do not accept them ignoring public input and making effective oversight by the public impossible.
And that's a perfectly reasonable position to argue --- one with which I would largely agree. We should be having that discussion.

My objection is solely restricted to the ad hominem attacks against government officials ("how can they sleep at night?"). I think that's out-of-bounds. Not everyone who disagrees with me is morally deficient.

(Just most people.)
jkhuggins is offline  
Old Dec 12, 13, 9:46 am
  #62  
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: 90,298
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
And that's a perfectly reasonable position to argue --- one with which I would largely agree. We should be having that discussion.

My objection is solely restricted to the ad hominem attacks against government officials ("how can they sleep at night?"). I think that's out-of-bounds. Not everyone who disagrees with me is morally deficient.

(Just most people.)
Some US government officials should be asked "how can they sleep at night?" given what has been authorized and/or done under claimed authorization.

By the way, most criminal trials include ad hominem "attacks" on the defendant and/or even some witnesses; and those "attacks" stand in the court record and are routinely allowed to be considered in deliberations by juries and/or judges.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Dec 12, 13, 10:14 am
  #63  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 16,512
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
And that's a perfectly reasonable position to argue --- one with which I would largely agree. We should be having that discussion.

My objection is solely restricted to the ad hominem attacks against government officials ("how can they sleep at night?"). I think that's out-of-bounds. Not everyone who disagrees with me is morally deficient.

(Just most people.)
Seeing as how some government officials refuse to comply with the laws of the land and no one seems interested in holding them to account ad homien attacks are about all that we have left. Take DNI Clapper for example. He lied to Congress and so far has gotten away with it.
Boggie Dog is online now  
Old Dec 12, 13, 10:23 am
  #64  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
Originally Posted by GUWonder View Post
Some US government officials should be asked "how can they sleep at night?" given what has been authorized and/or done under claimed authorization.
"The sleeping methodologies of DHS and TSA personnel are SSI."
Caradoc is offline  
Old Dec 12, 13, 11:14 am
  #65  
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: 90,298
Originally Posted by Caradoc View Post
"The sleeping methodologies of DHS and TSA personnel are SSI."


Extrajudicially getting put on blacklists is an ad hominem attack too. How people get on the aviation blacklists is SSI+ but even the government willfully decides not to investigate how some people have ended up on the blacklists and just tries to brush aside and bury under brush the administrative denial of the freedom of movement that so-called democratic governments are increasingly using against people not convicted of a crime in an open and fair trial.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Dec 17, 13, 12:30 pm
  #66  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,714
Originally Posted by halls120 View Post
What I got in return was an adamant "we aren't violating the Constitution, and even if we are, it's for the greater good." That same attitude permeates the NSA, the CIA, certain Hill staff, and others inside the Beltway who are in positions to be blamed if there is another large scale terrorist attack in the US.

Simply put, we have become a nation of sheep that are being led by well-intentioned individuals who are scared of doing the wrong thing, and as a result, the Constitution suffers.
Maybe my education was better than I thought (mix of public and DoDDs elementary and secondary schools, large state university for BS and grad school), but the "we are violating the Constitution 'for the greater good,' argument which I hear so much immediately raises my hackles." The whole point of the Constitution was to avoid that sort of logic, and that was grilled into me at every level of education from liberal, conservative, and even just-plain-kooky teachers.

I do think that most of these people do have good intentions, but they then rationalize obviously unacceptable behavior and get away with it. I can't tell for sure if they don't care about the innocent people who are impacted (and maybe have their lives ruined) by their actions or if they just find them to be acceptable collateral damage defending against this overly-magnified threat (which on most days just isn't there). It's the impact on the innocent people that I would hope causes sleep problems.

One of my best friends from a previous phase in my life works at no such agency and has for 10+ years. He was more libertarian than me in his youth. Good guy, patriotic, military brat like me, has wife and kids now. I wish I could sit and watch him leaf through a stack of articles on the actions of his employer, DHS, etc., and just watch his facial reactions. Deep down he must still know that our dad's didn't spend 20+ years each in the service and our grandfathers didn't slug through the mud and snow in 1944 for the American government that we have today.
studentff is offline  
Old Dec 17, 13, 12:41 pm
  #67  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 219
'The ends justify the means'. That's what it comes down to, and sadly, too many Americans believe it.
JObeth66 is offline  
Old Jan 14, 14, 11:01 pm
  #68  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Francisco, USA
Posts: 79
The Identity Project: "Trial judge finds for plaintiff Dr. Ibrahim in no-fly case"

http://papersplease.org/wp/2014/01/1...n-no-fly-case/
ehasbrouck is offline  
Old Jan 15, 14, 1:09 am
  #69  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: CPH
Programs: Delta SM
Posts: 497
Originally Posted by ehasbrouck View Post
The Identity Project: "Trial judge finds for plaintiff Dr. Ibrahim in no-fly case"

http://papersplease.org/wp/2014/01/1...n-no-fly-case/
Hallelujah! But the government will never let this ruling stand, as it has many means to make sure it never happens.
FredAnderssen is offline  
Old Jan 15, 14, 12:25 pm
  #70  
Moderator: Marriott Bonvoy & Travel with Children
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Winter Garden, FL
Programs: Delta DM-3MM United Gold-MM Marriott Lifetime Titanium Hertz President's Circle
Posts: 13,735
Still, it's a step in the right direction.

Bruce
bdschobel is offline  
Old Jan 15, 14, 2:54 pm
  #71  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: DFW
Programs: AS, BA, AA
Posts: 3,670
Originally Posted by bdschobel View Post
Still, it's a step in the right direction.

Bruce
^
janetdoe is offline  
Old Jan 15, 14, 8:52 pm
  #72  
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,051
Originally Posted by FredAnderssen View Post
Hallelujah! But the government will never let this ruling stand, as it has many means to make sure it never happens.
There's not much they can do other than appeal. State can still reject her visa application for almost whatever reason they want. The Court of Appeals is not going to upset Judge Alsup's factual conclusions unless clearly erroneous. He heard the evidence and it appears that he decided that Ibrahim was listed for no reason-- that the government made a mistake:

Originally Posted by Judge Alsup
Once a plaintiff shows concrete, reviewable adverse government action has occurred, and, as here, shows that the action resulted from an error by the government, then the plaintiff is entitled by due process to a post-deprivation remedy . . .
(emphasis added).

It appears from the docket that the government was fighting tooth and nail to hide this fact and they lost big time. The Court's legal conclusion that TRIP is an insufficient post-deprivation remedy is subject to review, but his factual findings about what TRIP is and what it does and does not do are unlikely to be upset. The specific remedy might get some tinkering, but the finding of fact that the government made a mistake is here to stay.
Ari is online now  
Old Jan 17, 14, 2:46 pm
  #73  
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,425
Originally Posted by Ari View Post
There's not much they can do other than appeal. State can still reject her visa application for almost whatever reason they want. The Court of Appeals is not going to upset Judge Alsup's factual conclusions unless clearly erroneous. He heard the evidence and it appears that he decided that Ibrahim was listed for no reason-- that the government made a mistake:

(emphasis added).

It appears from the docket that the government was fighting tooth and nail to hide this fact and they lost big time. The Court's legal conclusion that TRIP is an insufficient post-deprivation remedy is subject to review, but his factual findings about what TRIP is and what it does and does not do are unlikely to be upset. The specific remedy might get some tinkering, but the finding of fact that the government made a mistake is here to stay.
^^^^^^^^
nachtnebel is offline  
Old Feb 9, 14, 8:07 am
  #74  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: FKB
Programs: Skymiles - FO
Posts: 207
More info on the decision is coming out, slowly. The partially redacted court opinion is here. Apparently the entire order is due to be made public on April 15, 2014.
RedSnapper is offline  
Old Feb 12, 14, 4:37 pm
  #75  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Programs: DL, WN, US, Avis, AA
Posts: 662
More detail is out on the case

It appears the government screwed the pooch and then tried to cover it up by crying "Terrorism!!!". Wow! You mean government officials will lie to cover their backsides? Who could have seen that coming? (/sarcasm)

An article from Wired says that Prof. Ibrahim was initially placed on the no-fly list due to clerical error. Then the Justice Department spent years basically lying to the courts in an attempt to avoid embarrassment. Does anyone think TSA would falsely claim "SSI" just to avoid disclosing embarrassing facts, too?
T-the-B is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search Engine: