![]() |
Originally Posted by jrl767
(Post 37610658)
I’ll be curious to see if at least SOME major airports will implement SOME sort of “Pre-lite” with the laminated cards for pax who actually have Pre, and allow them to keep shoes on, keep laptops and 3-1-1 bags in carry-ons, etc
My guess given the idiot edict, that they want maximum pain. |
Originally Posted by FlyingUnderTheRadar
(Post 37610906)
My experience with major airports that have something akin to that post international arrivals is that it is very poorly executed. I have just exited and gone to the regular PreCheck lines. Obviously not an option currently. Where it has worked, again in my experience is at smaller less busy airports.
My guess given the idiot edict, that they want maximum pain. |
Originally Posted by MKE YX
(Post 37610421)
Given that Pre Check and Global Entry are fee-based programs with fees specifically used to fund those offerings....
|
Originally Posted by jdrtravel
(Post 37610936)
I think this is the most important point. These programs do not rely on congressional funding, so the claim that "shutdowns have consequences" falls flat. Will customers of these programs be offered prorated refunds? I hope a court quickly intervenes with this utter nonsense.
|
They managed to keep these programs going during prior government shutdowns, including the most recent, long, one. The administration could clearly keep them going if they wanted to.
|
Actually, PreCheck is staying open after all.
|
Now just need pressure on GE reversal
|
Originally Posted by MaxFlyer
(Post 37611133)
Now just need pressure on GE reversal
|
Is there standing for citizens, a citizen group, an industry group, whatever, to sue the federal government for saying "we're saving money" by doing something that obviously increases the cost of doing that thing?
|
Originally Posted by libove
(Post 37611172)
Is there standing for citizens, a citizen group, an industry group, whatever, to sue the federal government for saying "we're saving money" by doing something that obviously increases the cost of doing that thing?
The alternative might be to claim an agency action was arbitrary and capricious, but you'd still need to be directly affected. |
I have Global Entry, and I'm landing internationally at PHL in ten days...
But, clearly, there would need to be a Class, as I'm not going to file a single-person suit against the government ...
Originally Posted by drewguy
(Post 37611233)
Taxpayer standing is extremely limited: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitu...payer-standing
The alternative might be to claim an agency action was arbitrary and capricious, but you'd still need to be directly affected. |
WAPO TSA post, we hardly knew ya.
|
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
(Post 37610928)
Idiot edict? In reality since TSA isn't being funded they should be off the job completely. Regardless of which side of the coin you prefer the responsibility to fund government isn't being met.
|
Originally Posted by FlyingUnderTheRadar
(Post 37611425)
Yeah, it was an idiot edict. TSA is not being funded, neither is CBP, nor the Secret Service. So might as well shut the airports and the border down. However, they are considered to be essential so unfortunately they get to work without pay. Regardless of which side of the coin you prefer the responsibility to pay these essential people is the government's. Which was proposed but failed. So here were are.
My personal opinion is that TSA should be sent home until the congress critters figure things out. The heat under their feet would certainly get a bit warm. |
Reverse Course! (At least for precheck which is more critical for most of us)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ntry-shutdown/ |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:52 am. |
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.