TSA Changes Rules on Medical Cannabis (Quietly)
May 31, 2019, 7:37 am
#16
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,106
TSA can, and probably does, have its own set of regulations, policies, and standard operating procedures that are not codified in any CFR. As it is CFRs are not laws in the sense we typically think of laws and really are more administrative laws that cut across the whole Federal government. For instance the US Army has hundreds of regulations, field manuals, training manuals, standard operating procedures, etc., from the very highest Army-wide level down to the lowest unit level and the majority of those are not based on a CFR. That said there are some instances where a CFR is based on law and the CFR lays out how the Federal government will comply with and enforce the law. Typically the CFR lays out general guidelines and charges Federal agencies with enforcing the law and requires they develop their own appropriate set of regulations, etc. It’s a bit of a gray area sometimes hard to understand even to those of us in the Federal government. Bottom line is there may be a CFR that requires Federal agencies to adhere to and enforce Federal controlled substance laws but most probably doesn’t get down to the detail that TSA personnel are required to report suspected substances. That more likely is a TSA level regulation, policy, or other appropriate guideline.
edit to add: It should be no great task to recite the rule that requires such reporting if there is one.
May 31, 2019, 8:26 am
#17
Join Date: May 2011
Location: San Antonio, TX
Programs: AA EXP, DL Silver, Global Entry
Posts: 1,863
An internal government agency policy should not impact the public. We see local and state governments that have decided to not cooperate with certain federal agencies.
edit to add: It should be no great task to recite the rule that requires such reporting if there is one.
edit to add: It should be no great task to recite the rule that requires such reporting if there is one.
PS - To get what I think you’re looking probably would require a FOIA request. That potentially could show if there is a real or implied authority in the USC, CFR, or in internal guidance to report suspected controlled substances to local authorities.
Last edited by Randyk47; May 31, 2019 at 10:20 am
May 31, 2019, 10:21 am
#18
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: WAS
Programs: enjoyed being warm spit for a few years on CO/UA but now nothing :(
Posts: 2,507
I dont understand the fixation that if it's not in a statute or published in the CFR a federal agency cannot place on its employees a requirement (in this case, to notify proper authority of a suspected violation of law) on how to act/what to do in certain situations and the implication that absent such statute or CFR the employer's requirements are invalid.
May 31, 2019, 11:33 am
#19
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
TSA clerks wouldn't understand the differences if it hit them between the eyes. We are told that they aren't trained on drug interdiction at the academy (and, of course, we believe it), so they will have to rely on their own personal experience or what they see on HBO.
How much training will TSOs get to enable them to distinguish between hemp-based CBD products (legal) and marijuana-based CBD products (not legal)?
Or will they follow the usual TSA practice: when in doubt, confiscate, even if you are 100% sure it poses no threat to aviation security.
May 31, 2019, 11:37 am
#20
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
I dont understand the fixation that if it's not in a statute or published in the CFR a federal agency cannot place on its employees a requirement (in this case, to notify proper authority of a suspected violation of law) on how to act/what to do in certain situations and the implication that absent such statute or CFR the employer's requirements are invalid.
Now it sounds llke we have yet another TSA 'law' that really boils down to TSOs doing whatever they want.
The stupidest part? TSA routinely misses firearms which probably aren't enough to take down an airplane. They could certainly be used to cause bodily harm, but so could a laptop or martial arts skills.
So instead of paying more attention to screening instead of cellphones and personal chit-chat, TSA decides to make it clear that contrary to the evidence, TSA isn't specifically targeting drugs, although it will summon LE and make a report even if the TSO mistakenly identifies a baggie of oregano as marijuana. Additionally, the screeners who aren't looking for drugs and aren't trained to recognize drugs will now be tasked with reading labels to determine if CBD ointment is hemp or marijuana-derived.
All of this effort to tackle drugs that can't jeopardize aviation safety in any way. In the meantime, they continue to open containers of powders at checkpoints, knowing that the powders could be anthrax or fentanyl, genuine threats to public safety, on or off a plane.
Last edited by chollie; May 31, 2019 at 11:45 am
May 31, 2019, 11:50 am
#22
Join Date: May 2011
Location: San Antonio, TX
Programs: AA EXP, DL Silver, Global Entry
Posts: 1,863
From what I understand they don’t have that authority. Sounds like it’s a “see something, say something” policy and that gets dumped in the lap of the local police. Not sure what happens if the police say “no issue” when it’s legal in their state. I will say the quoted guidance in a posting above is clear as mud. I share Chollie’s concern that the new policy makes things worse instead of better.
Last edited by Randyk47; May 31, 2019 at 11:56 am
May 31, 2019, 11:50 am
#23
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
I'd like to know if weed confiscations are handled the same way firearm confiscations are handled, ie, LE takes charge of the confiscated material for proper disposal. I read that some airport has a bin for weed disposal next to the can for liquid disposal pre-checkpoint. I'd want to know who takes custody of that disposal bin and what audit trail there is.
May 31, 2019, 12:15 pm
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,106
I'd like to know if weed confiscations are handled the same way firearm confiscations are handled, ie, LE takes charge of the confiscated material for proper disposal. I read that some airport has a bin for weed disposal next to the can for liquid disposal pre-checkpoint. I'd want to know who takes custody of that disposal bin and what audit trail there is.
May 31, 2019, 12:20 pm
#25
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
Not if it's a TSO because the laws that apply to TSOs are SSI, so we have no way of knowing what is allowed and what isn't. They take possession of prescription meds that are not their own, so presumably illegal drugs would be handled the same way.
May 31, 2019, 12:53 pm
#26
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: TPA/DFW/K15
Programs: AA EXP, Mar AMB, HH LT DIA
Posts: 1,652
If it is mandatory, that means no TSO is allowed to ignore the law/rule/regulation at his/her discretion.
Now it sounds llke we have yet another TSA 'law' that really boils down to TSOs doing whatever they want.
The stupidest part? TSA routinely misses firearms which probably aren't enough to take down an airplane. They could certainly be used to cause bodily harm, but so could a laptop or martial arts skills.
So instead of paying more attention to screening instead of cellphones and personal chit-chat, TSA decides to make it clear that contrary to the evidence, TSA isn't specifically targeting drugs, although it will summon LE and make a report even if the TSO mistakenly identifies a baggie of oregano as marijuana. Additionally, the screeners who aren't looking for drugs and aren't trained to recognize drugs will now be tasked with reading labels to determine if CBD ointment is hemp or marijuana-derived.
All of this effort to tackle drugs that can't jeopardize aviation safety in any way. In the meantime, they continue to open containers of powders at checkpoints, knowing that the powders could be anthrax or fentanyl, genuine threats to public safety, on or off a plane.
Now it sounds llke we have yet another TSA 'law' that really boils down to TSOs doing whatever they want.
The stupidest part? TSA routinely misses firearms which probably aren't enough to take down an airplane. They could certainly be used to cause bodily harm, but so could a laptop or martial arts skills.
So instead of paying more attention to screening instead of cellphones and personal chit-chat, TSA decides to make it clear that contrary to the evidence, TSA isn't specifically targeting drugs, although it will summon LE and make a report even if the TSO mistakenly identifies a baggie of oregano as marijuana. Additionally, the screeners who aren't looking for drugs and aren't trained to recognize drugs will now be tasked with reading labels to determine if CBD ointment is hemp or marijuana-derived.
All of this effort to tackle drugs that can't jeopardize aviation safety in any way. In the meantime, they continue to open containers of powders at checkpoints, knowing that the powders could be anthrax or fentanyl, genuine threats to public safety, on or off a plane.
May 31, 2019, 6:26 pm
#27
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,332
TSA can, and probably does, have its own set of regulations, policies, and standard operating procedures that are not codified in any CFR. As it is CFRs are not laws in the sense we typically think of laws and really are more administrative laws that cut across the whole Federal government. For instance the US Army has hundreds of regulations, field manuals, training manuals, standard operating procedures, etc., from the very highest Army-wide level down to the lowest unit level and the majority of those are not based on a CFR. That said there are some instances where a CFR is based on law and the CFR lays out how the Federal government will comply with and enforce the law. Typically the CFR lays out general guidelines and charges Federal agencies with enforcing the law and requires they develop their own appropriate set of regulations, etc. It’s a bit of a gray area sometimes hard to understand even to those of us in the Federal government. Bottom line is there may be a CFR that requires Federal agencies to adhere to and enforce Federal controlled substance laws but most probably doesn’t get down to the detail that TSA personnel are required to report suspected substances. That more likely is a TSA level regulation, policy, or other appropriate guideline.
I dont understand the fixation that if it's not in a statute or published in the CFR a federal agency cannot place on its employees a requirement (in this case, to notify proper authority of a suspected violation of law) on how to act/what to do in certain situations and the implication that absent such statute or CFR the employer's requirements are invalid.
Basically, if they're not required by some federal law to report suspected illegal substances, then they shouldn't be reporting them because such reporting presents a genuine security risk to the traveling public.
From what I understand they don’t have that authority. Sounds like it’s a “see something, say something” policy and that gets dumped in the lap of the local police. Not sure what happens if the police say “no issue” when it’s legal in their state. I will say the quoted guidance in a posting above is clear as mud. I share Chollie’s concern that the new policy makes things worse instead of better.
Karate man bruises on the INSIDE.
<deleted by moderator>
Last edited by TWA884; May 31, 2019 at 11:10 pm Reason: FT Rule 8, no animated images permitted
Jun 1, 2019, 6:17 am
#28
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
I dont understand the fixation that if it's not in a statute or published in the CFR a federal agency cannot place on its employees a requirement (in this case, to notify proper authority of a suspected violation of law) on how to act/what to do in certain situations and the implication that absent such statute or CFR the employer's requirements are invalid.
But in the event a substance appears to be marijuana or a cannabis-infused product, we’re required by federal law to notify law enforcement. This includes items that are used for medicinal purposes.”
Jun 1, 2019, 6:56 am
#29
Join Date: May 2011
Location: San Antonio, TX
Programs: AA EXP, DL Silver, Global Entry
Posts: 1,863
https://www.tsa.gov/news/releases/20...ing-procedures This TSA blurb mentions the Controlled Substances Act (Title 21 United States Code) as the source of their requirement to report discovered controlled substances to local authorities. I don’t have the energy or time to read through the several hundred pages of Title 21 to see what authorities are set out.
Jun 1, 2019, 11:39 am
#30
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
https://www.tsa.gov/news/releases/20...ing-procedures This TSA blurb mentions the Controlled Substances Act (Title 21 United States Code) as the source of their requirement to report discovered controlled substances to local authorities. I don’t have the energy or time to read through the several hundred pages of Title 21 to see what authorities are set out.