Texas bill would make invasive pat-downs a felony

[IDemo]

Source: USA Today

FORT WORTH, Texas (AP) — A former Miss USA's tearful claim that she was groped during a pat-down at Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport could be a criminal matter under a bill gaining momentum in the Texas Legislature.

The proposed Texas law, aimed at people conducting security checkpoints at airports and public buildings, would make it a felony to intentionally touch someone's private areas — even on top of clothing — unless the officer or agent has probable cause to believe the person is carrying something illegal.

State Rep. David Simpson, R-Longview, who sponsored the bill, said Friday that the invasive pat-down searches at airports nationwide are a violation of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches. Last fall the Transportation Security Administration implemented a new pat-down procedure that includes a security worker running a hand up the inside of passengers' legs and along the cheek of the buttocks, as well as making direct contact with the groin area.

"We're taking away people's dignity and freedom," said Simpson, whose bill was approved in committee and is now awaiting debate by the full House. Simpson has 70 co-authors on the bill, which is more than 90% of the votes needed to pass it. The bill then would go to the Texas Senate for consideration.

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-04-29-texas-airport-screening_n.htm

[truthisfreedom]

1. Texas can go ahead and lead the way on this one. I guess all parties can get behind

this.

[sofa king]

5. They don't need to look for anything smaller than wire cutters in Texas.

(According to the very stupidest part of the Internet, it's still illegal to carry wire cutters in your pocket in Austin. The law originally referred to the range wars of Texas, in which cattlemen would cut through the fences of homesteaders to drive their stock to market. The cops in Austin must have a helluva collection of multi-tools by now. Edit: Or more likely, the story is bullsh!t.)

[Viva_La_Revolution]

8. Mostly true...Fence Cutters' War

I heard about it growing up in Colorado, in ranching country. The Phillips county museum has a fascinating barb wire exhibit, hundreds of different types.

here's the story..

During the 1870's barbed wire began coming into Texas. At first some stockmen ridiculed the newfangled fencing, but the far-sighted ones appreciated the advantage of controlling their own pastures. They began buying land with good grass and water and fencing it. In 1882 the Frying Pan Ranch, in the Panhandle, spent $39,000 erecting a four-wire fence around a pasture of 250,000 acres.

However, not all cowmen had the vision or the money to buy and fence ranches. Many of the smaller ones continued to graze their herds on what was left of the open range, most of it still owned by the state. As they saw fences enclosing choice pastures along streams, they became alarmed. The fencing made it harder for them to find enough grass and, in dry spells, water for their herds.

The plight of the farmers and small stockmen was made infinitely worse by the severe drought of 1883. The grass withered and turned brown. The earth cracked. Creeks dried up, and water holes that had supported large herds shrank to muddy ooze. In some sections, prairie fires added to the disaster.

Some of the open-range cowmen moved farther west, but fences stopped them there, too. Enraged at finding no range for their cattle, which were gaunt now and bawling for water, these small cowmen joined with the homesteaders in protesting that fences extended across public roads prevented people from riding to school or church and impeded the delivery of mail. One settler, E. S. Graham, said that some ranchmen invited trouble "by fencing large bodies of land that did not belong to them and by trampling on the rights of the public."

for the rest of the story,
http://www.jcs-group.com/oldwest/war/texas4.html

and, according to the internets, it is still illegal to carry wirecutters on your person in Austin, and in all of Texas, it's illegal to carry pliers!
http://www.britsinamerica.us/games/texaslaws.php

[wpelb]

6. They got behind Miss USA

Or should I say they got Miss USA's behind.

(Assuming her allegations are true, of course.)

[ZombieHorde]

2. Awesome. nt

[bluestateguy]

3. Good, but I don't think TX has authority over the TSA

Maybe it took the Miss USA being patted down to get this to change.

I wonder if these white Republicans are thinking about all of the young black and Hispanic young men who are thrown up against police cars and invasively searched. If the law stops that then good deal.

[tomm2thumbs]

7. good point in your post

[LisaL]

10. Just because someone works for TSA does not mean they can not

be arrested and charged.

[marybourg]

12. Google "supremacy clause" nt

[LisaL]

14. Which law allows TSA to preform "enhanced" pat downs without

probable cause?

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

22. There is no federal legislation or federal court rulings enabling freedom fingerbangs

The practices of the TSA are merely administrative policies,

[DailyGrind]

31. I didn't realize the TSA were all powerful

Oh yeah, they're not. If you're cool with them massaging your daughters crotch in the name of "security" then more power to you. Or should I say less.

Young white men get patdowns too by the way.

edit: typo

[Canuckistanian]

4. Are they going to send in Texas State Troopers to arrest TSA employees?

How will this work?

[LisaL]

9. TSA employees are not above the law. As far as I can tell.

[COLGATE4]

11. The question is which law are they supposed to obey? They

are operating under a Federal Mandate, presumably pursuant to Federal law. Federal Law clearly preempts State Law on an issue like airline security, so the Texas law, like so many of the other laws the Rethugs are wetting their pants to pass these days, is preempted by Federal. The TSA people can keep performing their duties so long as they are in accord with Federal regs.

[LisaL]

15. What federal law are they obeying exactly?

Which federal law allows TSA employees to pat people down without having any probable cause to do so?

[COLGATE4]

20. See my answer to #18

[primavera]

18. Of course, but it would provide a basis for challenging the reg

To the best of my knowledge, TSA is not acting upon any statute, but rather in accordance with an internally generated policy implementing the statute, which may not even have gone through the notice and comment process needed to become a reg. If a state statute conflicts with something that is not a statute, not a reg, but merely an internal memo? I would think that would at least compel TSA to attempt to promulgate a bona fide reg validating the practice and it's unlikely such a reg would survive notice and comment.

[COLGATE4]

19. It would in fact be challenging a reg, issued pursuant to the general law

which created the Department of Homeland Security. Administrative Law is very tricky, but in my experience given the procedural differences between Ad Law and Civil Law, challenged decisions generally tend to favor the administrative agency. I don't know if the regs regarding this went thru notice and comment, or if they were somehow deemed exempt from that process for reasons of national security. Certainly, if the guidelines for searching passengers are only created pursuant to an internal memo, that would be grounds for challenge. I'm not sure how far it would get. However, this is eventually going to be resolved in court once the administrative appeals process (if any) is exhausted. In court we get right back to the central issue of preemption. Certainly the government can convincingly argue that the area of airline security is a field which is intended to be occupied by the Federal, not State government.

[primavera]

21. Agreed, if it's already a promulgated reg...

... then you've got to get past Chevron and it's a seriously uphill battle. I just can't see TSA having published a proposed reg stating that they get to fondle the genitals of passengers and it surviving - would the Congressional Record even publish such an X-rated notice? :-) My suspicion is that they're simply interpreting existing statutory authority, and interpretation is assailable.

[COLGATE4]

23. You're undoubtedly correct that the reg under which TSA is acting

would not be so explicit. More probably fuzzy like "carry out such search of the person as is reasonable and practicable under the circumstances". It's then up to the agency to determine what is 'reasonable and practicable under the circumstances'. While interpretation is assailable, the burden is going to be on the person contesting the government's interpretation of the reg. And once that appellate process is exhausted, it's on to court. Still a very hard row to hoe.

[Welibs]

13. It's okay with me if Texas is used by gun totin' terrorists as a landing pad to get into the US! S

Suck it up Texas, I thought you were all so tough down there! They should grow up!

[martymar64]

29. This Texan thinks you should fuck off.

Enjoy your stay, you Texas bashing turd.

[DailyGrind]

32. What a moronic comment

Suck it up and let some security guard scrub your nads because some bureaucrat thinks it's a good idea to cover his butt against anything that might possibly ever happen?

Texas stands up for the right not to be oppressed. You should try it sometime instead of just falling under whatever boot seeks to crush you.

Go friggin Texas.

edit: spelling

[mysterysoup]

16. All this means is that TSA will have to say the bell went off...or...

one of their pyschological "screeners" snooping around the airport thought you looked a little funny.

[boppers]

24. Miss USA refused to be scanned.

"Probable cause" right there, so basically, this is a vanity law with no teeth.

[Honeycombe8]

25. I think her point was that the searcher went too far....

and did it because s/he saw the opportunity to cop a feel. I think that's it.

I hadn't heard that she'd refused the scanner, though. I thought it was that TSA had some reason they decided to cop a feel. There are other circumstances they can decide that, beside the person refusing to be shot of radiology beams at close range.

[24601]

27. And just what court defined that as probable cause? n/t

[U4ikLefty]

28. The court of Boppers' ass. nt

[Hubert Flottz]

17. So it would be a crime to like your job?

Finally you find a job that you really enjoy and POOF!

[Honeycombe8]

26. This doesn't surprise me. I thought this would happen. TSA workers,

who aren't well trained to begin with, use the pat down as an "opportunity," whether to cop a feel, humiliate someone intentionally, or as a joke. TSA workers are humans. Humans do that sort of thing.

I read the story that one of the TSA workers himself lodged a complaint against the others when, after being scanned, the other workers passed around the image of his penis and made fun of its size. They saw it as humorous. They disregarded the rule that they aren't supposed to "capture" the images, not to mention pass it around, not to mention use it as the basis of jokes.

But TSA workers are humans, and some humans do that sort of thing.

[Imagevision]

30. How invasive? are they going inside?