There are laws and there are the whims of a particular screener. My suggestions and opinions are mostly based on non-lawyer observations:


I don't believe you have to tell them you are taping them. If I recall, a lot of the Rodney King footage came from a bystander whom wasn't noticed by the cops. If the cameraman had been doing anything improper, you would think that the judge would have thrown out the evidence of the videotape.

There was a pretty famous incident near St. Louis a few years ago. A 19 year-old kid was so tired of being pulled over and harassed by the local cops that he bought a camera for his own car. He taped a blatant incident of police harassment -- video and audio. The cop got fired and, I think, got some jail time. There were links to cop forum web pages, and most of the conversation revolved around how much the other cops wanted to torture and draw & quarter the guy.

So, I could be totally wrong, but my guess is that it's legal but the TSA and the cops would intimidate the daylights out of you. Fortunately, the kid in St. Louis had the guts to go through with it.

If you dig further, they do specifically mention the Privacy Act in several places throughout their privacy section (which is what I linked to). Again, how well they follow that and to what degree they exempt themselves from it... well, that's another story entirely.

IIRC, the department in question also tried to claim the officer's own camera footage was unavailable for some reason.

According to this article, the teen in question had not only gotten an inappropriate traffic ticket previously (the reason he cited for having installed the camera), but had actually received death threats on an online forum frequented by the STL cops.





Indeed, he received a lot of intimidation, with officers publically making statements that they wanted to "tow the car and take the kid to jail," etc.

The only problem with taping at a TSA checkpoint, IMHO, would be the claim (valid or not) that it's against the rules due to the potential to capture and then disclose SSI.

More on-topic, there have been other recent cases where LEOs have reacted poorly when discovering they're being recorded. Wasn't there a guy taping an inappropriately-conducted arrest in 2007 at some point who was himself threatened and arrested for doing so? Can't recall the details yet...

... but the salient point here is that if you record the encounter, it will likely escalate things to the point where the LEOs totally side with the TSA and will end up running you in. Assuming your recording isn't destroyed and you keep your cool throughout the encounter, you'd have grounds to pursue action afterwards, if you don't mind the disruption to your trip and the arrest, etc.

Local laws vary. In Florida, it is against the law to audiotape anyone without their consent. Video is okay, however. It's an interpretation of a wiretapping statute, if I remember correctly.

IANAL2, but I would say that a local (non-federal) LEO approaching you in an airport would need a Terry-type (reasonable and articulable) justification unless you are in flagrante delicto. Simply standing in a line-up prior to a TSA checkpoint ought not to qualify as either.

Upset a screener to the point where he/she calls a LEO and you can bet that the situation will have been exaggerated to the extent that the cop can claim to "reasonably believe" a crime/misdemeanor is being or is about to be committed.

We have seen some examples where the LEO has blown off the screener(s), but those are few and far between. As I wrote before, they count on nobody being willing to pursue the question of whether they are acting legallly or not. And that's exactly what happens 99.99% of the time - stand up to them and they'll ruin your day.

Airports are not Federal property. The Federal government 'owns' the areas where it can conduct immigration, customs, and agricultural inspections, and it can 'own' certain airport items like the Control Tower, operating surfaces and navigation aids (either directly, or by regulatory control) - but the airport property and buildings, including the terminal space, are owned by the state, county or municipality or other operating organization which runs the airport.

Any local LEO or the TSA claiming the airport terminal is a 'federal building' is smoking something.

What to I tell them at DCA?

That's why concessions renting space in the airport must follow local and state regulations relating to alcohol service, etc., in addition to the federal regulations associated with airports.

From the MWAA website:

The Federal Government transferred both DCA and IAD to the MWAA (Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority) for a 50 year lease under Title VI of Public Law 99-500 in 1986.

The LEOs at both airports are certified by the state of Virginia.

Yeah, if you stopped by the SKL in SFO last fall, you found out the hard way!

I don't believe DCA is considered federal property or a federal building, despite being built by the feds. It's located in Virginia and run by the MWAA, which was created by VA and DC jointly. Apparently, prior to the establishment of the MWAA, both airports were operated by the feds, and IAD was on land in VA acquired by the feds... but court cases held they are "in" VA for practically every purpose, as do federal regulations. And the LEOs involved, outside the MWAA cops, are for the local jurisdictions (Arlington County for DCA).

Exactly...MWAA is the owner and operator of record, therefore they are the current owner of the terminal space. It is not federal property, nor is the terminal a federal building.

Good to know!

I've considered ways to record "encounters" with TSA as well.

Right now I think my approach would be to calmly pull out my phone, start the voice recording and then state the following:

"This is ------my name--------. It is xxx o'clock on --date--. I am at ---terminal / airport ---. With me are --- names of TSA and LEOs present ---.

Gentlemen do any of you object to a recording of this conversation in order to preserve an accurate record?"

If anyone objects I will cease recording but at least I will have them telling me not to record on record. If things go badly after that I would hope any impartial reviewer would have to question why one party wanted an accurate record kept and the other party didn't. Of course, that assumes that any reviewer would actually be impartial.

What are the cops like at DCA? Do they tend to take the TSA's side, be neutral, or do they just pooh-pooh minor TSA "concerns" (read: tattling)? I tend to fly DCA, but never seen a police officer and TSA actually work together.