cottonmather0

This is a great point and something I've pondered: how is it legal for TSA - a government agent - to search your stuff and then use against you any evidence that they ostensibly aren't looking for and would have no other power to search?

Private security searching you voluntarily is just that: private. An agent of the government is a whole other can of worms.

GUWonder

"Consent search" either way.

Airport screeners "profiling" for terrorists is voodoo "security" and nothing but a fishing expedition for no good reason.

GUWonder

Here is the TSA's "solution" to the media coverage about its racist profiling activities: more online "education" and "tests".

http://inamerica.blogs.cnn.com/2012/...s/?hpt=hp_bn13

Pesky Monkey

They need somebody to be a fall guy for a case that the ACLU can take to the Supreme Court. This is how they won precedential cases in the past but they appear to be sleeping at the wheel.

gsoltso

I have never been issued a quota like they indicate in the articles, and I have never gone into a bag looking for anything other than possible threat items. IF something illegal is found during that process, per SOP we report it to the local LEOs.

gsoltso

I know that I am picking nits, but there is no such thing as "reverse discrimination". Any form of discrimination is at it's very core, simply discrimination.

WillCAD

Strange how I said exactly the same thing to a coworker this morning while were discussing past speeding tickets.

I don't consider it picking nits; I consider it a fundamental difference in attitude. It's all just as repugnant, no matter who does it to whom.

gsoltso

^

cottonmather0

This is where my problem lies and where I think there is a conflict with existing 4th Amendment jurisprudence. The carve-out for "administrative" searches has nothing to do with finding "something illegal". Period. That carve-out was written 40 years ago (with a couple of tweaks over the years) based on metal detectors and bag x-rays looking for explosives and weapons.

Unless it's a weapon or some other explicitly defined item that is prohibited for air travel, it's none of TSA's business. Or at least it shouldn't be.

jkhuggins

I think the real problem here is that TSA employees, as public employees, are obligated to report when they suspect a crime is being committed --- even if that crime is unrelated to their duties. This isn't without precedent in other sectors of public life. For example, my pastor told me about a member of his former congregation who, as a firefighter, couldn't attend any service where open candles were being lit, because in that jurisdiction, open candles technically violated the fire code. And, in general, having public servants turning a blind eye to crimes being committed presents its own problems.

On the whole, I agree that administrative searches tend to look like warrantless searches for contraband --- or, at least, have the same effect. I'm just not sure how you navigate between those two alternatives, neither of which is ideal.

Caradoc

Another issue is that many of them are too stupid to understand what is a crime, and what is not.

Like traveling with $10,000 in cash. At least one TSA employee was rather insistent that it was a crime...

cottonmather0

Yeah, that's the problem and why it's not necessarily a "consensual search" if it's required to travel on a plane and it's being administered by a federal employee. Either they shouldn't be obligated to report anything except guns and explosives or federal employees shouldn't be the ones doing the searches.

studentff

I think a fairly bright line could be drawn if the government weren't on such a power trip.

IMO screeners should look for WEI as they are mandated to do. And I have no problem with them reporting "obvious" crimes--e.g., the "severed human head in carry on" used so often as an example--or "obvious" non-WEI threats to the airport/aircraft--e.g., a bag full of live snakes. But they should report such crimes using the same channels and the same authority and having the same credibility that a private citizen would in contacting the police. And if the alleged threat item turns out to be non-existent or not a threat, they should be penalized as individuals for filing false reports to the police.

Anything else they should butt out if it's an administrative "implied consent" search. To my knowledge, as a private citizen I am under no obligation to report "possible" crimes like large amounts of cash, bags of white powder that could be flour, multiple IDs, etc., that I might see in plain sight as I go about my day or that I might see someone attempting to "artfully conceal" on their person. That TSA insists on doing so is a power trip and an excuse to justify their bureaucracy.

Caradoc

To be fair, it's entirely understandable that they would do so. Without the bureaucracy, they'd all be unemployed.

gsoltso

I can understand that point of view, and it has merit, but currently the regulations given to TSOs contradict that by indicating we are to report the other illegal items we find incidental to the original search item.

I can't contradict what is said here either. We are simply told we are to report them to local authorities to deal with.

Again, understand and see the merit in your statements. This is a policy question that none of the front line employees (like me) are going to be able to change.

The distinction in your position is that we are instructed to do this as part of our training. I understand the point that many of the folks here make that it is not a part of WEI it shouldn't be reported, but at this time, the SOP says we are to report it.