Legality of Reverse Screening
 

What's the legal basis for reverse screening on domestic flights?

I understand the argument that screening is voluntary and the TSA can deny you boarding if you refuse it, but what can they do if you refuse a reverse screen? You've already arrived and I don't think they have any legal ability to hold you without arresting you.

Interesting question.

My guess is that TSA cannot detain you, but that the FBI or the local polcie can. I am not sure who conducts these reverse screenings, but I would guess that federal law enforcement is involved.

Refusing to submit to a search could be grounds for detention in that it arouses the suspicion of the officers doing the search. If that alone is enough grounds for an arrest, then the police can do a full search of your person and possesstions as a search incident to arrest.

That's an awful slippery slope. Can someone verify that? Refusal to submit to a search leading to arrest? On what charge?

I don't know about arresting you but they can certainly "detain" you. I'm not sure for how long though...Perhaps as much as 2 days without charging you or allowing you to phone someone.

Trying to remember - has there been a reverse screening on a domestic arrival?

I have witnessed such a screening and local law enforcement was involved as well.



[This message has been edited by HugeAss (edited Jan 06, 2004).]

There have been plenty.


>>Trying to remember - has there been a reverse screening on a domestic arrival?<<

Anyone refuse to volunteer for screening?

HA and TSAMGR,

Can you explain exaclty what Reverse Screening is to me? My airport has never dealt with it and we the screeners have never been shown what to do.

The most I can think of was when there was a breach at another airport and one plane had already taken off and it landed at my airport. Cops pretty much set up a line between the gate and the exit to the checkpoint. All passengers off that plane had to stay in that line and exit the area.

If you could give the basics of it, that would be cool, but if it's considered SSI, don't shot yourself in the foot.

The legality has been questioned, but it's legal. The response has been that boarding an airplane includes implied consent that one will undergo searches of one's person and belongings, even on multiple occasions.

Or else what? Prior to boarding one can be denied boarding, afterwards one is, what? Arrested for changing their mind?

I'm not buying that. In articles I've seen they've described a process where passengers are reverse screened after leaving an aircraft at their final destination. If the point at which a screen ceased to be legitimate isn't disembarcation, then when is it? Why can't the police follow you out of the airport and stop you on the street?

Regarding implied consent. There's no such thing in this case. No signs have ever been posted regarding the possibility of reverse screening and no notification has been given.


[This message has been edited by whirledtraveler (edited Jan 06, 2004).]

We had a bomb threat called in on a flight that was actually landing at my airport. What happened was they isolated the aircraft at the far end of one of the taxiways and then all passengers and their carry-ons were brought into the terminal ( which I thought was pretty idiotic,boom there goes the terminal) and all passengers were rescreened there was no option to refuse. And dogs were run through the aircraft and the checked baggage. Law enforcement was involved and possibly federal officer also.

Kathleen Sweet's book, Terrorism and Airport Security (2002) discusses the legal precedents for consent to be screened, particularly the notion of "implied consent."

Sweet doesn't specifically address reverse screening, so perhaps the legal justification should be reviewed. The question, of course, is "When does a flight end?" This would include my pet peeve: post-arrival screening of international passengers so that they can make it through the secured area to the baggage claim. This occurs in Atlanta, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Seattle, and some others.

I agree, it should be clearer to passengers that they can be searched as many times as the authorities see fit.

Ahhh, the "land of the *free*" (NOT).

Dave

The interesting thing to me is the escalation. I suppose that back during the immediate post-9/11 period when there was screening at the gate, if someone declined there, chances are they would be escorted out of the secure area and miss their flight. Problem solved, still voluntary.

Now, if they choose to screen on an airplane or after landing, if someone declines, well, then what? Arrest? On what charge? And, for what purpose? There's no longer a security threat for that flight. Why wouldn't they be just escorted out of the terminal?

[This message has been edited by whirledtraveler (edited Jan 07, 2004).]