TSA bus patrol coming to Houston
Apr 19, 2012, 12:34 pm
#31
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IAH mostly.
Programs: I still call it Onepass every now and then. Platinum.
Posts: 500
If a cop on the street has reasonable suspicion that you have committed, or are in the process of committing, a crime, he may detain you for a brief Terry stop, and frisk you and your clothing for any weapons. He may not search your bags without a warrant, if you are not being placed under arrest.
Under what authority, then, can a TSO or cop search your bag on the bus without a warrant?
Of course, it is highly unlikely that a passenger will stand up for his rights when confronted by an armed cop demanding to open his bag, and the only chance this has of being struck down is a passenger so declining a search, and either being forced off the bus, or being placed under arrest.
I have the sinking feeling that Constitutional considerations never even entered into the discussion over this program.
I'd love to know its genesis: Did it start from the local police? Did it start with DHS?
Under what authority, then, can a TSO or cop search your bag on the bus without a warrant?
Of course, it is highly unlikely that a passenger will stand up for his rights when confronted by an armed cop demanding to open his bag, and the only chance this has of being struck down is a passenger so declining a search, and either being forced off the bus, or being placed under arrest.
I have the sinking feeling that Constitutional considerations never even entered into the discussion over this program.
I'd love to know its genesis: Did it start from the local police? Did it start with DHS?
Reason had a good blog post on this particular story in Houston, which linked back to an old article about the question of "consensual searches":
The officer asked if he could pat Brown down, and Brown agreed. Discovering "hard objects which were inconsistent with human anatomy" on Brown's thighs, the police arrested him, put him in handcuffs, and took him off the bus. Then the officer turned to Drayton and asked, "Mind if I check you?"
It's hard enough to believe that Brown knew he was perfectly free to send the police on their way but nevertheless consented to a pat-down search, despite the fact that he had 483 grams of cocaine in his underwear. It's simply inconceivable that Drayton, who was carrying 295 grams, could see his buddy hauled off in handcuffs and still make the same mistake. No one capable of dressing himself--not to mention incorporating bags of cocaine into his outfit--is that stupid. But according to the police, that's what happened.
A far more plausible explanation is that Brown and Drayton felt compelled to cooperate under the circumstances. Most people probably would, unless they were told they had a right to say no. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit therefore concluded that the Tallahassee police had violated the Fourth Amendment's guarantee against "unreasonable searches and seizures."
According to the Supreme Court, the key issue in cases involving warrantless "consent" searches is "whether a reasonable person would feel free to decline the officers' requests or otherwise terminate the encounter....'Consent' that is the product of official intimidation or harassment is not consent at all. Citizens do not forfeit their constitutional rights when they are coerced to comply with a request that they would prefer to refuse."
The officer who patted down Brown and Drayton said he had searched about 800 buses in the previous year. In what must have amounted to thousands of encounters with innocent citizens, only half a dozen passengers had declined to cooperate. It seems unlikely that they were the only ones who preferred not to have police officers rummage through their bags or feel their thighs.
It's hard enough to believe that Brown knew he was perfectly free to send the police on their way but nevertheless consented to a pat-down search, despite the fact that he had 483 grams of cocaine in his underwear. It's simply inconceivable that Drayton, who was carrying 295 grams, could see his buddy hauled off in handcuffs and still make the same mistake. No one capable of dressing himself--not to mention incorporating bags of cocaine into his outfit--is that stupid. But according to the police, that's what happened.
A far more plausible explanation is that Brown and Drayton felt compelled to cooperate under the circumstances. Most people probably would, unless they were told they had a right to say no. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit therefore concluded that the Tallahassee police had violated the Fourth Amendment's guarantee against "unreasonable searches and seizures."
According to the Supreme Court, the key issue in cases involving warrantless "consent" searches is "whether a reasonable person would feel free to decline the officers' requests or otherwise terminate the encounter....'Consent' that is the product of official intimidation or harassment is not consent at all. Citizens do not forfeit their constitutional rights when they are coerced to comply with a request that they would prefer to refuse."
The officer who patted down Brown and Drayton said he had searched about 800 buses in the previous year. In what must have amounted to thousands of encounters with innocent citizens, only half a dozen passengers had declined to cooperate. It seems unlikely that they were the only ones who preferred not to have police officers rummage through their bags or feel their thighs.
It's all quite despicable if you ask me. Especially when it's something that's (in my opinion) benign, like simple possession of drugs that their trying to send you to prison for.
The way this connects to air travel is that way back when SCOTUS declared that directing someone through a WTMD before getting on a plane is "administrative", and therefore not a 4th Amendment violation, and thus law enforcement agencies and other government actors have steadily been widening that distinction for years. LEO's love this, because if they can search you "administratively" for a weapon on a pubic transit system, then they also get a fishing license to get a drug bust or a gun charge that they otherwise might be able to find without probable cause or a warrant. The Bill of Rights is intended to protect us from the cops, yet the concept of "administrative searches" - and letting them do whatever they want with whatever they find - tosses that whole rationale out the window. Cops and prosecutors want convictions and they see the constitution mostly as an impediment to that.
FWIW, as a civil libertarian, this is the main reason for my opposition to U.S. warmongering around the world - it gives the government an excuse to create a bogeyman that needs to be defended against and then you end up with nonsense like DHS and TSA and law enforcement agencies that then have permission to get around the Bill of Rights (not just the 4th Amendment) and basically do whatever they want under the guise of fighting that bogeyman.... like looking for drugs on a city bus and calling it a "war on terror."
Apr 19, 2012, 1:11 pm
#32
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 821
So basically, the law says that they only have to get a warrant if you refuse or if the cops notice something already to give them "probable cause." But, then and there, if you refuse or if you act nervous or the bus driver rats on you, they can still search without a warrant.
So I still do not see the legal grounds for these Houston bus searches, even when the cop does have reasonable suspicion.
Of course, since the TSA is involved, the Houston cops need only invoke "administrative search" and "terror sweeps" and the legally sanctioned searches on the NY subway -- which can only happen outside the turnstiles, giving the rider the option to walk away -- and the Constitution is thrown out the bus window.
Any notion of "anti-terrorism" on the bus system is disgusting. Over the past decade, of the billions of public bus rides that have taken place in this country, none have ended in a terrorist bombing. That even one penny should be spent on a "terror sweep" of any public bus system is indicative of a country that has lost its collective mind.
Apr 19, 2012, 2:02 pm
#34
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Finally back in Boston after escaping from New York
Posts: 13,644
Metro Police Chief Victor Rodriguez said the TSA's role in the sweep Friday was limited, with no TSA officials on buses.
"TSA was present to bolster the uniform presence on the (transportation) system," he said. "They provided behavioral detection officers who are specially trained to identify aberrant behaviors that may indicate potential terrorist activity."
"TSA was present to bolster the uniform presence on the (transportation) system," he said. "They provided behavioral detection officers who are specially trained to identify aberrant behaviors that may indicate potential terrorist activity."
YOMANK
Mike
Apr 19, 2012, 2:15 pm
#35
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Grand County, Colorado
Programs: IHG Plat, HH D, UA GS, Perm BonVoyed
Posts: 2,013
I live in Houston, regularly use Park & Rides, the Train and 102 IAH Express. I use the local transit buses on occasion. I'm sure going to have fun when I encounter a TSA trying to accost me. I'll be sure to report back here.
Apr 19, 2012, 9:46 pm
#36
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: SLC or DUB
Programs: The program formerly know as WorldPerks
Posts: 330
Apr 20, 2012, 8:31 am
#37
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IAH mostly.
Programs: I still call it Onepass every now and then. Platinum.
Posts: 500
Perhaps any lawyers could chime in, but I am not convinced that such a search is legal. Instead of being on a bus, let's say I'm walking down a street, and a cop suspects I just committed some crime. He can temporarily detain me in a Terry stop, and perform a frisk of my clothing for any weapons. However, absent an arrest or a warrant, and without seeing anything in plain sight, I don't believe the cop can legally search open up and paw through my bags as part of that Terry stop detention.
So I still do not see the legal grounds for these Houston bus searches, even when the cop does have reasonable suspicion.
Of course, since the TSA is involved, the Houston cops need only invoke "administrative search" and "terror sweeps" and the legally sanctioned searches on the NY subway -- which can only happen outside the turnstiles, giving the rider the option to walk away -- and the Constitution is thrown out the bus window.
Any notion of "anti-terrorism" on the bus system is disgusting. Over the past decade, of the billions of public bus rides that have taken place in this country, none have ended in a terrorist bombing. That even one penny should be spent on a "terror sweep" of any public bus system is indicative of a country that has lost its collective mind.
So I still do not see the legal grounds for these Houston bus searches, even when the cop does have reasonable suspicion.
Of course, since the TSA is involved, the Houston cops need only invoke "administrative search" and "terror sweeps" and the legally sanctioned searches on the NY subway -- which can only happen outside the turnstiles, giving the rider the option to walk away -- and the Constitution is thrown out the bus window.
Any notion of "anti-terrorism" on the bus system is disgusting. Over the past decade, of the billions of public bus rides that have taken place in this country, none have ended in a terrorist bombing. That even one penny should be spent on a "terror sweep" of any public bus system is indicative of a country that has lost its collective mind.
The point about the "Administrative Search" is what's important and since they're cops they can "keep what they kill" and arrest based on what they find during that search (drugs, guns), even though it's not what they were officially authorized to be looking for (al Qaeda)... which is the way they like it.
Apr 20, 2012, 5:42 pm
#38
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 821
Apr 21, 2012, 10:23 am
#40
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IAH mostly.
Programs: I still call it Onepass every now and then. Platinum.
Posts: 500
Metro: "We're going to search bags without a warrant and look for contraband!"
a week later...
Metro Website: "We performed random bag checks and founds hookers and drugs and people with outstanding warrants."
Public: "Yeah, we don't like those random bag searches and it doesn't seem like you actually were worried about finding terrorists and instead were just using that as an excuse to arrest people for other stuff."
Metro: "We're still keeping people safe and we didn't search any bags!"
Public: "Your website still says you did."
Metro: "Oh yeah, uh, well we didn't do that and the website won't say we did anymore... But we still can decide to do it anyway the future and the fishing tri- errrrrrr, terrorist threat isn't going away.... By the way, don't quote us on that."
a week later...
Metro Website: "We performed random bag checks and founds hookers and drugs and people with outstanding warrants."
Public: "Yeah, we don't like those random bag searches and it doesn't seem like you actually were worried about finding terrorists and instead were just using that as an excuse to arrest people for other stuff."
Metro: "We're still keeping people safe and we didn't search any bags!"
Public: "Your website still says you did."
Metro: "Oh yeah, uh, well we didn't do that and the website won't say we did anymore... But we still can decide to do it anyway the future and the fishing tri- errrrrrr, terrorist threat isn't going away.... By the way, don't quote us on that."
Apr 23, 2012, 1:54 pm
#41
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,956
A letter to the editor in the Houston Chronicle:
Objection to searches
Regarding "Undercover officers ride buses in anti-terror effort" (Page B2, Thursday), the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA), which represents more than 600 area criminal-defense lawyers, is alarmed that Metro Police Chief Victor Rodriguez invited Transportation Security Administration teams to conduct operations at Houston's bus stops.
The TSA is known for its disrespect for and abuse of airline passengers' civil liberties and dignity.
Metro said that agencies involved in the operations would, among other things, perform random bag checks.
Random bag checks are, except in very narrow circumstances (none of which apply to Houston bus passengers), illegal and in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.
Local Metro buses are overwhelmingly used by people who don't have cars. Bus passengers are the least affluent and the least powerful of Houston's residents. It also bears saying that they are predominantly nonwhite.
It's not that Chief Rodriguez is incapable of keeping Metro bus stops safe without federal help: According to him, even without TSA interference, Houston has one of the safest transit systems in the world.
So Chief Rodriguez invited an abusive federal agency into our community to perform illegal searches on the least powerful among us, and it wasn't even necessary. We object.
Earl D. Musick, president, Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association
Regarding "Undercover officers ride buses in anti-terror effort" (Page B2, Thursday), the Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association (HCCLA), which represents more than 600 area criminal-defense lawyers, is alarmed that Metro Police Chief Victor Rodriguez invited Transportation Security Administration teams to conduct operations at Houston's bus stops.
The TSA is known for its disrespect for and abuse of airline passengers' civil liberties and dignity.
Metro said that agencies involved in the operations would, among other things, perform random bag checks.
Random bag checks are, except in very narrow circumstances (none of which apply to Houston bus passengers), illegal and in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution.
Local Metro buses are overwhelmingly used by people who don't have cars. Bus passengers are the least affluent and the least powerful of Houston's residents. It also bears saying that they are predominantly nonwhite.
It's not that Chief Rodriguez is incapable of keeping Metro bus stops safe without federal help: According to him, even without TSA interference, Houston has one of the safest transit systems in the world.
So Chief Rodriguez invited an abusive federal agency into our community to perform illegal searches on the least powerful among us, and it wasn't even necessary. We object.
Earl D. Musick, president, Harris County Criminal Lawyers Association
Apr 24, 2012, 9:35 am
#42
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Grand County, Colorado
Programs: IHG Plat, HH D, UA GS, Perm BonVoyed
Posts: 2,013
This Thursday, April 26, there is a regular METRO Board Meeting. Several activists, including a well known local civil rights attorney, are scheduled to speak on this issue. It is at 9am, METRO HQ, 1900 Main, Second Floor.
Apr 24, 2012, 2:03 pm
#43
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 8,956
Will you be there? And if so, are you planning on speaking?
Apr 24, 2012, 2:25 pm
#44
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Grand County, Colorado
Programs: IHG Plat, HH D, UA GS, Perm BonVoyed
Posts: 2,013
No, I have prior obligation I can't get out of. Plus, I believe the deadline to sign up to speak passed. It is too bad, I know the METRO CEO and several board members. Normally, my comments hold a good deal of weight due to my involvement in local politics and I became the face of our local Occupy Wall Street movement.
Apr 24, 2012, 4:53 pm
#45
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,425
A letter to the editor in the Houston Chronicle: