FlyerTalk Forums

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)
-   Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/checkpoints-borders-policy-debate-687/)
-   -   Help with TSA litigation [consolidated thread] (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/checkpoints-borders-policy-debate/1737785-help-tsa-litigation-consolidated-thread.html)

Boggie Dog Jan 29, 2016 6:39 pm


Originally Posted by jackonferry (Post 26103283)
That is chilling.

Perjury, just another day in the life of a TSA employee.

saizai Jan 29, 2016 8:59 pm


Originally Posted by petaluma1 (Post 26102288)
Well, there was the guy in PHL that TSA had charged with some offense when he wanted to file a complaint about his treatment. He was jailed for about a day. But when the criminal complaint came before a judge, he threw it out because the TSA/TSA clerk lied.

Gentlemen has filed a civil case against TSA but I can't find the status of that suit.

Found it on PACER.

Roger Vanderklok v. USA, et al, No. 2:15-cv-00370-GJP (E.D. PA., filed Jan. 23, 2015)
Roger Vanderklok v. USA, et al, No. 15-3619 (3d Cir., filed Nov. 2, 2015)

Put it in my folder. Currently just have the dockets & district court documents that were on RECAP. (I have to pay up to ~$3 per document if I want the rest. Happy to get and share if someone'll reimburse me for it. :-P)

So far it looks like the TSA et al are winning. They got (almost?) all of the district case dismissed. Doesn't look like the appellate case has progressed much yet, but there's a brief by Vanderklok due Thursday.

Interestingly, TSA and Philly PD filed cross-claims against each other, presumably passing the blame. I haven't read any of the briefs yet.

saizai Jan 30, 2016 4:50 am


Originally Posted by KDS (Post 26098935)
I don't have a recording of the audio message that I heard at the checkpoint; I can attest to the quote about the technology "optional for all passengers" in the message. Will that be helpful?

If you can reliably quote, somewhat helpful yes. Hard proof like audio, video, or photo is better.

KDS Jan 30, 2016 6:02 am


Originally Posted by saizai (Post 26105010)
If you can reliably quote, somewhat helpful yes. Hard proof like audio, video, or photo is better.

Had my phone, etc. already secreted away in carryon bags when I was in line, so didn't have an opportunity to record it. If it's useful, I'll send you the affidavit by email this weekend.

Loren Pechtel Jan 30, 2016 10:35 am


Originally Posted by KDS (Post 26105142)
Had my phone, etc. already secreted away in carryon bags when I was in line, so didn't have an opportunity to record it. If it's useful, I'll send you the affidavit by email this weekend.

Yeah, that's the problem with trying to document abuse at the checkpoints.

yandosan Jan 30, 2016 2:43 pm

Further evidence the TSA screen is just an "obedience test" and
that any assertion of rights is the real offense these half-wits are prosecuting.

saizai Jan 30, 2016 11:49 pm


Originally Posted by KDS (Post 26105142)
Had my phone, etc. already secreted away in carryon bags when I was in line, so didn't have an opportunity to record it. If it's useful, I'll send you the affidavit by email this weekend.

Certainly useful. Also, you can use your phone — take photos of signs while in line; put it on video recording before you enter xray, and just put it camera side up in the tray so it's recording the whole time.

That will also get usable audio. That's how I got the SFO evidence.

saizai Jan 31, 2016 6:59 am

They haven't posted video yet, so… here's the slides from the talk I gave in Oct. 2015 about what happened to me at BOS, and TSA's obstruction of justice in covering it up. This was before I won the Rehab Act case compelling TSA to at least respond to me.

Some slides not accessible because TSA violated the E-FOIA Act. :/

Loren Pechtel Jan 31, 2016 9:37 am


Originally Posted by saizai (Post 26108565)
Certainly useful. Also, you can use your phone — take photos of signs while in line; put it on video recording before you enter xray, and just put it camera side up in the tray so it's recording the whole time.

That will also get usable audio. That's how I got the SFO evidence.

Isn't California an all-party state? Is that recording legal??

saizai Jan 31, 2016 12:59 pm


Originally Posted by Loren Pechtel (Post 26110007)
Isn't California an all-party state? Is that recording legal??

You're thinking of wiretapping laws. Yes, CA is an all-party state for e.g. phone call recording.

However, recording in public is perfectly legal. Presence in public area constitutes consent. Especially if it's a government agent, in the course of their official duties, being filmed in order to record evidence of a federal crime, and recording openly. (They knew I was recording, and I confirmed.) TSA's rules allow recording of anything other than SSI (though they have no authority to stop non-"covered persons" from doing whatever they want with SSI). Even the DOJ has submitted amicus briefs *against* cops who try to stop people from recording them on duty.

Kremmen Feb 1, 2016 7:31 pm


Originally Posted by saizai (Post 26043649)
I would just love it if I could get this before the 9th Circuit and have Kozinski write an opinion about their suggestion that transferring my liquids into 30 3.4 oz bottles is a "reasonable alternative accommodation"… and their claim that taking them at their word is per se "objectively unreasonable".

Back when the silly liquid rules came in, I was wondering about this: If I want to carry a 750ml bottle of duty-free alcohol, I'm not allowed to. However, it should be okay to turn up at a checkpoint with a 8 empty 100ml bottles and a funnel, decant the big bottle, carry it, empty, with the 8 little full ones through security, then refill the main bottle immediately afterwards.

What would the TSA do if someone actually did this? Surely someone must have tried it by now? My suspicion is that the TSA agents would get angry and delay the passenger and that it is therefore not a "reasonable alternative" in that they are telling you they would let you do that, but in reality it would not go smoothly for you even if you tried.

sethb Feb 1, 2016 8:01 pm


Originally Posted by Kremmen (Post 26118502)
Back when the silly liquid rules came in, I was wondering about this: If I want to carry a 750ml bottle of duty-free alcohol, I'm not allowed to. However, it should be okay to turn up at a checkpoint with a 8 empty 100ml bottles and a funnel, decant the big bottle, carry it, empty, with the 8 little full ones through security, then refill the main bottle immediately afterwards.

What would the TSA do if someone actually did this? Surely someone must have tried it by now? My suspicion is that the TSA agents would get angry and delay the passenger and that it is therefore not a "reasonable alternative" in that they are telling you they would let you do that, but in reality it would not go smoothly for you even if you tried.

I don't think you can fit 8 100ml bottles in a quart bag. I've carried 4 that way, and the TSA didn't care (if they even noticed).

And most duty-free shops are inside Security Theater, so your liquor is there already.

Kremmen Feb 1, 2016 8:18 pm


Originally Posted by sethb (Post 26118627)
I don't think you can fit 8 100ml bottles in a quart bag. I've carried 4 that way, and the TSA didn't care (if they even noticed).

And most duty-free shops are inside Security Theater, so your liquor is there already.

I've seen people get away with having more than one "dangerous liquids" bag. If they are strict on limiting it to one per person, it would just require two people travelling together.

(The aside about duty-free shops being airside isn't relevant. Duty-free within the US is also mostly useless, due to having a tiny, over-priced selection. The duty-free that matters is that brought in from other countries, which you then can't carry on your domestic connection because of the TSA.)

Finkface Feb 1, 2016 8:23 pm


Originally Posted by Kremmen (Post 26118502)
Back when the silly liquid rules came in, I was wondering about this: If I want to carry a 750ml bottle of duty-free alcohol, I'm not allowed to. However, it should be okay to turn up at a checkpoint with a 8 empty 100ml bottles and a funnel, decant the big bottle, carry it, empty, with the 8 little full ones through security, then refill the main bottle immediately afterwards.

What would the TSA do if someone actually did this? Surely someone must have tried it by now? My suspicion is that the TSA agents would get angry and delay the passenger and that it is therefore not a "reasonable alternative" in that they are telling you they would let you do that, but in reality it would not go smoothly for you even if you tried.

I do this all the time. There is a particular liquid hand soap I like from a store in Hawaii. I never check a bag so I decant the soap from the original 8oz pump bottles into several 100ml travel bottles and pack the empty original container. I have managed to squeeze 12 or 13 100ml bottles into my ziplock (OK, it's a little bigger than it should be :D) and 4 empty hand soap dispensers. All in my carryon. Never had a problem and I have done this at least 6 times in the past year or so. I do have PreCheck so generally the liquids bag stays in my carryon but I have had to put it in the bin a couple of times when the Pre line was closed and no one batted an eye.

N830MH Feb 2, 2016 12:35 am


Originally Posted by saizai (Post 26091253)
Like mine, then. Sure. That's part of the reason I want it abolished; I think it's grossly inappropriate for screeners wanting to exert their authoritay to interrogate me about what is or isn't medical, or to make determinations thereof. None of their damn business.

Saizai, you got keep fighting with TSA & the courts. If you won the case. I'm tired of waiting!!! TSA should known better! I sneaks a bottled water at security by 2 months ago. I put bottled water in my pockets and no one see it. I visit into the entire concourse to watch the plane. While I work at PHX Airport. I have non-SIDA badge. I think it's time to abolished the TSA. End the TSA. NOW!


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:57 pm.


This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.