I searched, I really did, but I couldn't find the answer. Since the name game now seems to have made it to JFK, my question is (and again, I'm sure it's been answered many times): What are the consequences if I refuse to say my name out loud and say "It's right there on my boarding pass and my ID"?

I did that 2 weeks ago, honestly wasnt thinking about it. Wasn't rude, but just said "Um, you have it in your hands?". She kinda snickered and let me through. Don't know honestly if it means more to not say it??

I don't think we know the SOP (it's undoubtedly SSI). YMMV, but at a minimum, you should expect that not cooperating will attract additional scrutiny. The additional scrutiny may take the form of closer inspection of your bags (pulling things out and swabbing it thoroughly) or giving you additional screening (whether you go through WMTD or WBI). There may also be efforts to record your name from your boarding pass and ID. Or, nothing may happen. You may get a screener that does not launch in to red alert mode.

At AUS it gets you a full 1/2 hour SSSS proctology, including swabbing of each and every item in your bag using a separate swab for each item. Plus the full grope & ETD check of your body (with genital fondling included) & shoes. All clearly retaliatory. It was obvious that they would have made it longer and more intrusive if they could.

Simply put, you are not required to state your name and cannot be denied entry to the secure area if you do and you are not interfering with the screening process-no matter what the TSA says.

Simply show them a copy of this:

CFR 1540.107
http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/1540.107

We do this by presenting our I/D and BP

and specifically noted in subsection b1 and c

We do this by presenting our I/D and BP

and CFR 1560.3 defines a "Verifying Identity Document as

So with all of that, there is nothing that says one is required to state their name

Tee hee hee, you're a silly boy. Quoting that whole "rule of law" thingie. Next, you'll want us to believe that the TSA is governed by the Constitution.

Mike

Everytime TSA does that to me (almost always at JFK) I need to suppress a laugh because I think back to the movie Animal House where the Fraternity President says to the Pledges, "I state your name do...." and the Pledges rather than actually stating their name say "I state your name do..."

I always ask the TDC to see my travel documents, as I do not want to give a name that is different than what is on my boarding pass and identification. They never seem to understand the irony in that.

A few weeks ago at JFK, I gave them a different first name and pronounced my last name so unintelligibly as if Vanna took all my vowels.

"Have a nice day" was her response.

I have had decent luck by saying that "I plead the Fifth Amendment." If the supervisor (who inevitably gets called over) needs clarification, I explain that I refuse to answer incriminating questions from government agents who are trying to gather evidence against me. If I give the wrong answer to the question, that would be used as evidence against me, therefore I cannot be compelled to answer it.

Wait!! How does this square with Gilmore? If there is no option to board the plane without showing ID, then wouldn't the decision in this case be irrelevant/overturned? It seems like this resurrected old thread may be more relevant than I thought...

ETA: The full text of goalie's CFR is But I would argue that the 'authorized by TSA on a case-by-case basis' would violate due process, since there is no clarity on when you will be admitted or denied entry sans ID.

The only place I have consistently gotten the name game is Houston (IAH). One reason I have seen on this site they do this is that it is a penalty for failing some standard. I don't know if that is true or not.

At IAH, they refused to let me pass the TDC without saying my name. I tried for about 5 minutes then called a supervisor. Supervisor said same thing. At this point, I gave up, pulled out my DL (I use a passport card for the TDC). Looked at it, pulled out another copy of my BP, compared the two very contemplatively, then read the name incorrectly, but close.

They let me pass. I took my BP from the TDC and tossed it in the garbage (which I always do after they write on it).

last I tried to say "your name" when they said say your name. It didn't fly. Even better, my traveling companion replied, "No, he's on second" when asked, "What is your name." Didn't work either.

After much introspection and consideration, I have determined that the asking of my name is a trivial matter as much as I hate answering. It is trivial as they already have my name and a verbal confirmation is worthless to them and requires little effort on my part. Likewise is the question about where I am going as long as the destination airport on my boarding pass is a sufficient answer. Once again they already have this information and attempting to withhold it in a verbal manner is insignificant.

It is my opinion only and you are welcome to yours.

However the game changes when they ask me where I will be working, where I am staying, what I will be doing and any number of other questions. These questions are not trivial. I will ask for a supervisor and ask one question, well rehearsed: "What properly codified regulation or public law requires that I submit to a personal interrogation of a confidential nature to board an aircraft for domestic travel?"

I may miss my flight. I may not be allowed into the sterile area. However, there are some battles that must be fought. This is one hill that I will try to take.

Fortunately, none of the airports I use have made me test this, but I am firm in my resolve that I will not submit to this type of interrogation just to get on a plane.

BTW, it has been a long time since we heard of one of these, except from BDO's, here on FT. Did the PIPI's end?

This is a rational and agreeable approach. My only concern is the "slippery slope" argument. Simply put, each intrusion, legal or illegal, warranted or unwarranted, is marginally only a little worse than the last one. They require ID already, so saying my name is not that big a deal. They require my BP already, so that stating my destination is not a big deal. This is entirely rational and true (IMHO).

However, what if we went back to before there were TDCs? What if all of a sudden, we now have to give ID, give a BP, state our name, give our destination, when before, all we did was go through the WTMD?

My only point, is that little battles lead to little victories, that are winnable and that add up over time. Not fighting these battles means that each additional intrusion by the TSA eventually becomes a monumental intrusion.

Just a thought(s).

I agree. There is one difference. There is a published regulation that I must give my ID and BP to the TDC unless I want to undergo a thorough physical screening. I agree as well that the saying of ones name is not part of that requirement, but it is a trivial addition in that the name is required and it is required that it match the travel document. I do not like it. I do not want to do it. But, we must choose our battles carefully or we spend our entire time in trivial skirmishes. That is why the PIPI is where I draw the line. It is not required in any form, written or spoken.

I just play mute and make some hand gestures.