This came up over in the Newsstand forum. I thought I remembered someone saying here that there is a point of no return when entering the checkpoint. That is, say I enter the checkpoint, and then when I realize that the search is going to involve feeling my breasts I decide that I no longer want to consent to the search and wish to leave the airport unmolested (literally). Can the police arrest me at that point for refusing search?

It came up in the context of airports trying to re-screen arriving passengers before letting them into the terminal. Would this be a similar situation in which there is no way to withhold consent for a search? Could someone be arrested for refusing to allow their possessions or person to be re-searched at that point?

Yes, that is my understanding.

Actually, I believe that you can refuse the search at any time during the process. They cannot arrest you for refusing the search. However, at the point you revoke your consent, you must leave the screening area into the non sterile area at once. A screener or LEO should escort you out of the area. Now I don't know what happens to your bags at that time. I would assume you forefit your rights to the bags, or have to claim them from the airport later. It is my understanding that your bags are in the possession of TSA until they release them back to you at the end of the search or X-ray belt.

The consequences of refusing the search are probably not worth the effort. I would believe that you could not travel that day, even if you went through another checkpoint, as I am sure there would be some notation on the BP. Also I would worry about the possibilty of ending up on the no-fly list, just because they could.

Of course this is just my opinion, I could be wrong.

MSY-MSP,

Are these just your guesses? Or do you have some info on whether people have actually done this?

The situation I described in the second half of my message would give people a very good reason to refuse search - they've already arrived at their destination and just want to leave the airport with no further violations of their privacy and dignity. It seems likely, however, that passengers who are disembarking a plane could be held against their will and forcibly searched. Does anyone know of relevant case rulings or what the procedure would be if someone landing at their destination refused an additional search?

You could refuse security screening. Then the airline can and will refuse to fly you, and in my previous life I have denied boarding to two customers who did not desire to have their bags opened in secondary screening. This is stated pretty specifically in conditions of carriage at my former employer and I'm sure at the other carriers as well.

You raise an interesting point regarding screening upon arrival. That, I am not sure. I'm all but certain that a refusal would result in at least an interview with law enforcement.

As far as the "point of no return" at the checkpoint. (Keep in mind this was current as of 6 months ago) If you elect to withdraw from the screening process before it has begun, that's your business. However, if you enter the process, and alarm, they are required to contact law enforcement if you then elect to withdraw. Doesn't mean you will be arrested. Just means that they have to alert law enforcement. I'm sure someone like TSAMGR or other folks can elaborate on this.

The turn around experience at the primary checkpoint, I know from discussions with various TSA supervisors at MSP. They are really good at telling me what happens if you do X during screening.

The only experience I have with a rescreening upon arrival is at MSP. When that happened they forced all through the customs and immigration area. Those with connections went through the sceening that they use to get you back to the terminal, and those who were disembarking at MSP went out through the regular customs exit. At the exit there were a couple of Airport police pulling people aside randomly. I got through without a problem.


I missed the second part of the post. (got a phone call in the middle of responding.) As for refusing a search upon landing. I would assume that you can still refuse. Now will they listen to it, that is another question. Most likely you cannot, unless they follow the experience I had at MSP. I think the reason for the rescreen may dictate whether you can in reality refuse or not. Though, talking to a co-worker whose two brothers are LEO's at MSP, a refusal in this situation will get you a nice long talk in the station.

I have long questioned the need to rescreen terminating pax at an airport. I understand for conecting pax. The rationale that i was given is that they want to know if anything did get through, at the other airport. In this case, I do not believe you will be able to refuse. If you refuse, and the LEO shows up to take you. He will search you anyway to ensure his own safety.

I hope this makes sense.

TSA can refuse you passage through the checkpoint.

Certainly would.

Law Enforcement would be notified due to the suspicious nature. You may or may not be refused access to any flight that day.

And when the LEO comes, you should immediately ask "Am I under arrest?" If the answer is no, the the next question is "Am I free to leave?" Repeat those questions as necessary.

Wow. So we not only have to consent to search in order to fly, but we have to consent before we know what the search or searches might entail. We can from that time forward be searched again and again, before, during, and after our flights, in any manner chosen by the authorities, with no right of refusal, until such time as the presiding LEOs say we can go. The picture of civil liberties in air transportation gets bleaker and bleaker.


Is anybody else scared yet?

Tell it to the Judge

Oh, say can you see through the dawn's early light,
How so proudly we failed at liberty's last gleaming,
Those broad stripes and bright stars thru the perilous flight,
O'er the televisions we watched were so gallantly streaming.
And the people's blank stare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our fear was still there.
Oh, say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave? No.

We've talked about this before.

I have a huge problem with security screening passengers who have completed their trip and are not flying again on the same day.

This is the case in passengers arriving in Atlanta, Cincinnati, Cleveland, and some other airports. The customs and immigration area is contained in a remote location. Passengers must pass through a sterile area to get outside of the terminal. So passengers have to be rescreened after clearing customs--even though they're only headed outside to cars and ground transportation.

On one occasion, I arrived at CVG after a long flight from Paris. I had to wait 30-45 minutes in line, take off my shoes, have my stuff swabbed, etc. even though I was done flying for the day. I was too tired to resist but I desperately wanted to refuse screening and say, "Just let me go home!"

To my knowledge, the TSA and Airport Authorities have taken no action to correct the poor planning at these airports. It seems particularly expensive and time-consuming to screen all of these people who are merely leaving the airport. I'm surprised others have not attempted to refuse screening.

No, because I dont do anything to warrant being scared. Flying is not a right. There is no Constitutional Amendment that says, "Thou shalt have the right to fly to Duluth." Nor is it in the Bible from what I have read. Its a contract between you and a transport company which is governed by a regulatory agency which calls a lot of the shots. That agency is empowered by Congress which is empowered by the Constitution to enable it to call the shots. Just like when you make a transaction at a bank. The regulatory agency in that case can and often does look at the transaction even though you are "at a point of no return". You cant say no, you cant stop it. Their justification is that you consented to the search when you opened the account and made the transaction. Just like you consent to a search when you buy a ticket and fly on an airline. I agree that getting searched on arrival is suspect and probably could be challenged with a reasonable chance of success but I expect that any other challenges would be shot down pretty quickly.

Ah, hah, hah! Flying is not a right. There is no Constitutional Amendment that says, "Thou shalt have the right to fly to Duluth."

So, since neither the Constitution nor the Bible say anything about urinals, I do not have the Constitutional right to urinate in one, right? Sounds very... literalist... in fact, on par with some radical Salafist staments!

I don't really think you meant it to sound like that, but... what a hoot!

(No, I do not have problems with real security - as a survivor of a terror bombing myself. But... we DO have freedom to travel, and to be free of unreasonable search and seizure. We'll argue what that means, but, probably even flying to Duluth.)

Personally, no, I'm not scared. I'm not hiding anything, nor am I overly concerned that the government is watching me. Probably because I work for the government and I'm used to the government watching me. Ha!

I suppose if I knew the answer to our security quandry, I'd be in charge. I don't, so I'm not. I do know this.... until we as a country decide that it is ok for "big brother" to know who is getting on these airplanes (or ships or trains or whatever), then we are going to have to get used to a pretty thorough physical screening.

Trust me, in my previous airline life, I had my share of gripes at TSA....got some in this life too.... but I ain't about to say let's go back to the way it was.

Just this person's view. Yours may be different, and unlike a lot of my rightward and leftward leaning friends, I've never had a personal problem with people who didn't see things the same way as me.