|
Originally Posted by Global_Hi_Flyer
(Post 12022977)
On further thought, I'd also write a snail-mail letter to Delta's CEO. Delta doesn't really care, but you should point out that this experience does not make you want to come back through their main hub.
|
Originally Posted by AisleSitter
(Post 12041606)
What is your basis for making that statement? The TSA has the right to search at an administrative checkpoint. Two guys walking up to you are not an administrative checkpoint. It's just a consensual encounter. The TSA can't arrest you or detain you or eject you; they are not police officers. As for the police, I also believe that the police have no right to eject you if you refused to consent to a random search inside that area. You have just as much right to stand there as all the other passengers, including arriving passengers; using the restaurants, shops, etc. What would be the justification?
Now, the TSA could stand at the gate and probably order the airline not to let you board. What would the police say if you then decided to do some shopping (like many of the other people there?). Perhaps the airport manager could demand that you leave, and invoke a trespassing charge if you do not. They cannot remove you from the airport, and although the police do not have the right to remove you, they can get such authority (in blanket form or on a case by case basis) from the airport authority. You cannot pass the checkpoint without consenting to the search. Your consent 'technically' extends into the sterile area - but since you've already passed, you can withdraw your consent and ask to leave the sterile area. The issue comes down to whether or not the cop is going to say 'fine' and walk you out, or is going to give you a hard time. Obviously, the thug described by the OP would have probably arrested him for disorderly had he refused the search or questions or even told the cop to stop lecturing him. The OP could respond by filing a lawsuit and probably settle for a nice little damage award, but each individual needs to decide how far they want to go before pushing their rights. A bad cop will try to curtail your rights and gamble you won't sue, or that he can intimidate you into not suing, or suspect you won't sue because you're not local. As to the TSA? If they stop you anywhere outside the checkpoint or sterile area, you're free to tell them to p*** off and walk away. They cannot search you outside the checkpoint or the sterile area. They cannot detain you for questioning anywhere, including the sterile area. If they try to grab and hold you, fight back - you're being assaulted and are entitled to do so. All they can do is call the police - they have no authority to do anything but call the police, or have their superiors call the airline and demand you not be flown. The only time you really need to weigh the pros and cons of pushing your rights is when dealing with the cops. |
Is Willie Williams still the FSD at ATL? He was worthless as the chief of police in LA, so I guess the Peter Principle is still at work there. I would address him regarding his employees. If they said they "saw" you clear security, and you were in transit that is a bold faced lie. Someone needs to be accountable.
airline brat 53 |
You need to file a complaint. Or request that you be searched at a TSA checkpoint (instead of frightening everybody around the gate area).
Originally Posted by FWebb
(Post 12022270)
"...If they say jump, you say how high."
|
Originally Posted by AirlineBrat53
(Post 12042149)
Is Willie Williams still the FSD at ATL?
|
Originally Posted by bocastephen
(Post 12041840)
I'm the second last person on earth (after Spiff) to give the TSA a break on anything, but they (as did their predecessors) have the right to search anyone and anything inside the sterile area. You give that consent when you enter the sterile area.
Nope. If someone wants to know what I consent to, they can ask me. If they feel that they can tell me what I consent to, it's clear that they don't understand what consent means. |
Originally Posted by whirledtraveler
(Post 12043939)
If someone wants to know what I consent to, they can ask me. If they feel that they can tell me what I consent to, it's clear that they don't understand what consent means.
It's entirely possible to consent to something without being aware of it. People do it all the time ... shrink-wrap license agreements, signing long contracts without reading all of the fine print, accepting the terms and conditions on a theater ticket without reading the details, and so on. So, what a person has knowingly given consent to may be quite different from what a person has actually given consent to. So, the operative question here is ... by entering the sterile area, does one implicitly give consent for further searches? Again, I'm not a lawyer, nor a self-proclaimed security expert, so I'm not qualified to answer. But it's entirely possible that a passenger may have given consent for searches anywhere in the sterile area without being aware of having given that consent. (And, yes, we could go off onto a tangent about whether or not such implicit consent clauses are really legal and/or enforceable and/or just. Let's accept that argument as read and move on ...) I would happily accept confirmation or correction from anyone who knows what they're talking about in this regard ... :) |
Originally Posted by jkhuggins
(Post 12044011)
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
It's entirely possible to consent to something without being aware of it. People do it all the time ... shrink-wrap license agreements, signing long contracts without reading all of the fine print, accepting the terms and conditions on a theater ticket without reading the details, and so on. So, what a person has knowingly given consent to may be quite different from what a person has actually given consent to. So, the operative question here is ... by entering the sterile area, does one implicitly give consent for further searches? Again, I'm not a lawyer, nor a self-proclaimed security expert, so I'm not qualified to answer. But it's entirely possible that a passenger may have given consent for searches anywhere in the sterile area without being aware of having given that consent. (And, yes, we could go off onto a tangent about whether or not such implicit consent clauses are really legal and/or enforceable and/or just. Let's accept that argument as read and move on ...) I would happily accept confirmation or correction from anyone who knows what they're talking about in this regard ... :) Basically, upon presentation to the checkpoint, and upon entering and remaining inside the sterile area, you are giving consent to a search at any time. IIRC, the older signs stipulated that you could withdraw consent and leave the sterile area or checkpoint - not sure if the TSA signs say the same thing. Bottom line - no one is going to hold you down and search you without an arrest. The TSA cannot arrest, you, so all they can do is call the cops. You're free to refuse the cop's search and request an escort from the sterile area - but your results will depend on that individual cop. You can't stay in the sterile area or board your flight after refusing a search - and that's been the case for years before the TSA |
You handled better than I would have. I would have refused the search and probably lost it enough to be arrested for disorderly.
BTW, who wants to go to Cleveland anyway? |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:25 pm. |
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.