TSA Agents Can Now Grope Travelers Without Fear Of Pesky Lawsuits

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screeners have gained the upper glove when it comes to being sued by travelers subjected to assaults, false arrests or other abuses, thanks to a Wednesday ruling by a federal appeals court.

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/perfectly%20legal%20now.jpg?itok=GRTVV7rh

In a 2-1 decision, the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled that TSA screeners are not “investigative or law enforcement officers,” which shields them from liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). 

While the judges said they were “sympathetic” to concerns that their decision would leave victims of TSA gropings with “very limited legal redress,” the panel ultimately concluded that screeners and security personnel are not covered by the law.

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/not%20ideal_0.jpg?itok=-LV6Kno7

For most people, TSA screenings are an unavoidable feature of flying, and they may involve thorough searches of not only the belongings of passengers but also their physical persons — searches that are even more rigorous and intimate for individuals who happen to be selected for physical pat-downs,” wrote Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause in her decision.

The Wednesday ruling came as a major defeat for Nadine Pellegrino – a Boca Raton business consultant who sued the TSA for false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution over a July 2006 incident at the Philadelphia International Airport. 

According to court papers, Pellegrino had been randomly selected for additional screening at the Philadelphia airport before boarding a US Airways flight to Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Pellegrino, then 57, objected to the invasiveness of the screening, but conditions deteriorated and she was eventually jailed for about 18 hours and criminally charged, the papers show. She was acquitted at a March 2008 trial.Reuters

Circuit Judge Thomas Ambro was the lone dissenter on the panel, who faulted the majority judges for preventing victims of TSA abuses from recoveries “by analogizing TSA searches to routine administrative inspections.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/just%20let%20it%20happen.jpg?itok=zH5ajpsq

The court did note, however, that the head of the TSA – the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security does have the authority to designate TSA employees as “law enforcement officer[s] under 49 U.S.C. 114(p)(1).

The same court threw out a First Amendment claim against the TSA last August, after Roger Vanderklok said he was arrested in retaliation for a request to file a complaint against a surly TSA supervisor.

Come fly the friendly skies!

https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/your%20choice.jpg?itok=iRV4q4JA

***

Here you go, monkeys:

We identified several such factors: (a) TSA agents are part of the country’s national-security apparatus; (b) Congress is in a better position than the Court to recognize a new species of liability; and (c) TSA agents are not typically law enforcement officers.

What the Court is saying here is that they have no remedy to give to the Plaintiff.  Congress, in drafting the post-9/11 transportation security laws, left some vagueness as to just what a TSA (Transportation Security Agent) is in the eyes of the law.  As they then go on to say, a TSA agent is not typically a law enforcement officer. They explain earlier that some TSA’s are designated as LEO’s by virtue of their position (“An employee so designated may carry a firearm, make arrests, and seek and execute warrants for arrest or seizure of evidence.”)  The point here being that the Court determined that the sued parties were not liable under the law; in other words the lady’s lawsuit was flawed, according to the court. This will likely be appealed, but whether the SCOTUS will take it is another question.  I’m guessing they will: what the Court described in this ruling is a fustercluck of a law that needs serious amending.

In discussing point (c), we referred  back to our discussion of the FTCA claim and emphasized the highly circumscribed and administrative nature of the TSO role: TSA employees typically are not law enforcement officers and do not act as such. As  previously discussed, only those TSA employees specifically designated by the Under Secretary with the responsibilities of an officer, in accordance with 49 U.S.C. § 44903(a), operate like police officers. As a result, line TSA employees are not trained on issues of probable cause, reasonable suspicion, and other constitutional doctrines that govern law enforcement officers. Instead, they are instructed to carry out administrative searches and contact local law enforcement if they encounter situations requiring action  beyond their limited though important responsibilities.

In other words, Shaniqua at the porno-scanner with the magic wand is not an officer of any kind, just Shaniqua who be working for the gubmint.

The question is, how do you go about suing her when she chimps out with her authorita or steals your new Adidas?

Source: ZeroHedge

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.