A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed most of the constitutional claims raised by a Charlottesville man who was arrested after stripping down to his running shorts during an airport checkpoint protest…
False imprisonment and malicious prosecution claims against three Richmond International Airport police officers were not included in the motions for dismissal.
Aaron Tobey, 21, was detained at an airport security checkpoint on Dec. 30 after partially disrobing to display part of the text of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment handwritten on his chest. Tobey says he was protesting security measures, including enhanced pat-downs and the use of whole-body imaging scanners that he believes violate the Constitution’s protections against unreasonable search and seizure.
…Judge Henry E. Hudson also rejected the equal protection and search-and-seizure claims against the TSA screening officers who summoned police, but said it was premature to dismiss the free-speech claim…
Tobey, a University of Cincinnati student at the time of the arrest, staged the protest as he prepared to board a flight to Wisconsin to attend his grandfather’s funeral. Disorderly conduct charges were later dropped by the Henrico County prosecutor.
Lettering surely ain’t bad – if he did it himself. Decent hand-and-eye coordination.
This is a very hott topic here.
#21, 1), 2), 3)
All of these are excuses, not justifications.
(I got a good laugh at #2. Yeah, that’s a good reason — it’s easy to pass it onto the unaccountable federal government.)
Furthermore you raise and interesting idea that would be outside of the scope of an agency called the Transportation Security Administration.
Not really. There has already been talk about using them at temporary gatherings.
And I wouldn’t be surprised if there isn’t already another department in the works that does the same thing as the TSA but for areas such as this, Infrastructure Security Agency?
Would you pitch a bitch then or just slowly bend over and grab your ankles?
More on point: are you saying that people have no expectation whatsoever of security when they are traveling?
Absolutely not. But it is not security when your two choices are being irradiated or groped. It is oppression.
#24, That doesn’t disguise the fact we are talking about SECURITY GUARDS, and not foreign invasion forces.
Um, you used the National Security ploy to justify them and now you are saying it is not national security? Did I miss something?
You either feel it is a NS issue or not. If it is, you’ve lost the argument. If it isn’t, then they are clearly violating the constitution.
Do you even feel they are violating the constitution?
Maybe your rhetoric is a bit overblown?
Maybe you need your pecker squeezed in public in a bit more?
They didn’t do a very good job on 9/11 did they?
We’ve learned a lot since then, too.
Case in point. Shortly after the planes were allowed to fly again, Southwest Airlines starting packing the linebacker sized males in the front 12 seats. Simple.
LOCKABLE cockpit doors. Simple.
Armed pilots. Simple.
Fear of lawsuits from the families of passengers and fines from the federal government for failing to protect their riders. Simple.
Good for you Aaron.
Yes, thank you for your courage. About time today’s youth spoke out against the BS that GWB started.
Reminds me of Ashton Kutcher.
I applaud this man. More push-back against the overpowered government(s) like this is warranted. And more pushback than this TYPE is warranted.
Afterwards the kid went to a nightclub, waited in line for an hour before being frisked and let in behind the velvet rope. No problem.
Liberty-lover: brake fluid plus pool shock makes a pretty damned big fire. I’ve used a couple ounces of each for a show-off fire with Scouts, but a pound of shock and a quart of DOT3 fluid…I don’t know the chemistry but the exothermic reaction is awesome. Did I say I like playing with fire? lol
Anyway, this protest is useful to keep the TSA on their toes, and let them know Americans aren’t going to put up with too much. Otherwise, it was a waste of time.
I hope his grandfather would have approved.
Besides the “4”, impressive lack of mistakes!
If the police do something to lure you into a situation in order to arrest you, its called entrapment. Looks like this guy was basically doing the same thing to entrap the TSA. This guy is a douchebag and you jerks praising him are even bigger douchebags.
Ya !!! You guys are douche bags !!! I have no idea why but the use of ad hominems always seems to make some people happy. And I don’t know why someone would be upset that someone is standing up for his free speech rights.
BUT YER STILL DOUCHE BAGS !!!
@McCullogh #20,
I’ll bite, what is the root cause?
#40–Hmmmm==gee…..close…..but no banana. Entrapment is when the police coax a person to do something they ordinarily would not and that something is illegal.
There is nothing illegal about writing words on your body. Meanwhile, the TSA is prone to violate personal privacy rights all the time.
The notion this guy is “wrong” or a criminal or somehow enticing the TSA to act incorrectly is nothing but retarded authoritarian book licking submission to authority.
Somebody above had it correctly stating the TSA should have simply said/thought “so what” and let the kid continue on his way. The fact that they did not shows the error/threat of their assumed authority over more than just airport security.
Suck ass much?
#16
#12 TSA has railway teams that mostly carry out inspections. It is a hell of a lot more work to make a train crash into a building than an airplane, what with their being tracks and all.
You have it all wrong. To crash a plane, you either have to sabotage it on the ground or be on it and take it over. Once its in the air (and if you aren’t on it), there isn’t much that can be done. To sabotage a train is many, many orders of magnitude simpler. Someone can simply set some C4 on the tracks and detonate it remotely. In addition, trains have stops where someone could drop something on the train which explodes later. Every stop has to be secured not just the main depot. Securing rail is much more difficult. Granted, you can’t easily fly into buildings with a train, but you can definitely cause lots of damage far easier than with a plane.
#32
“Um, you used the National Security ploy to justify them and now you are saying it is not national security? Did I miss something?
You either feel it is a NS issue or not. If it is, you’ve lost the argument. If it isn’t, then they are clearly violating the constitution.”
Your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired.
The specific court case that established the national security out for the government was fraudulent. It was about bad aircraft engine design that caused tons of deaths in WWII and later in a domestic crash that caused one of the some of the victims’ families to request the full crash report. It was total CYA by the military. That information should have gone out.
That doesn’t mean that the government shouldn’t have secrets. Claims of privilege should be looked at with a careful eye by the courts.
Secondarily, we have always interpreted national security in a very offensive minded way. To be truly secure we need to be a military hyperpower goes the thinking… but of course that is a bunch of crap.
The TSA is actually a national level org that focuses on security. They are… wait for it… security guards!
While the term is often abused it is entirely appropriate in this case.
At the end you describe the challenge of securing thousands of flights, hundreds of thousands of people, and millions of bags EACH DAY as simple. Is it really?
#43
“The notion this guy is “wrong” or a criminal or somehow enticing the TSA to act incorrectly is nothing but retarded authoritarian book licking submission to authority.
Somebody above had it correctly stating the TSA should have simply said/thought “so what” and let the kid continue on his way.”
Imagine if you were in line behind him. Lots of people just want to travel from one place to another with a minimum of travel. This guy bought a ticket with the purpose of making a scene. Should we really be encouraging that?
He should absolutely be arrested and given a fine at least as expensive as the ticket that bought him his 15 minutes of fame.
In this situation the offender is the asshole. Think back to that thing where people got arrested and knocked around for dancing in the Jefferson Memorial. That was 100% bad cops.
It depends on the details.
#45, You said in #10
You might have noticed that there are, um, National Security implications about who gets on what flights with what items.
You defended the need for TSA via the National Security Dodge.
At the end you describe the challenge of securing thousands of flights, hundreds of thousands of people, and millions of bags EACH DAY as simple. Is it really?
Not any harder than keeping thousands of planes with the greasy side down.
You still haven’t answered the question about whether you think this is a violation of the 4th amendment. Do you have a comment on that?
#47
Are you really that dense?
Let me try again: The idea of NS is often misused, but it is appropriate in the case of TSA.
# 46 chris said,
“It depends on the details.”
Let review some history here. It’s a true story of a once upon a time, when America came to be. Once Americans where an indomitable, independent thinking bunch that to no end annoyed our dear authoritarian ruler, George III, who was so appalled by the colonist he declared Americans have loose morals and are “certainly criminal” actors.
So I find it hilarious # 46 chris you are indeed a reincarnation of George III thinking. Congratulations your mind has successfully regressed ~250 yrs. You show us how stupidity never does leave the populous, does it?
#49
“So I find it hilarious # 46 chris you are indeed a reincarnation of George III thinking.”
Please tell me more.
Also, I don’t think I said he was “certainly criminal”(did search a text search on the thread), but I’m pretty sure he will be charged with a minor crime. Something like disturbing the peace with a fancier name. That is the correct outcome. It’s called civil disobedience and it happens all the time.
A few hundred people have gotten arrested recently in DC for protesting the proposed Tar Sands pipeline. They show up; they refuse to leave; they get arrested and released with a ticket after a few hours. That’s what happens.
Your contention that this guy is like the founding fathers is flat wrong. When they stood up they faced death, no question, if they got caught. This guy is going to get a ticket.
If I’m missing something please tell me.
p.s. Details really DO matter.
#48, Yes, I am. I am a hard-headed Libertarian who believes the government shouldn’t be x-raying or groping everybody who goes through line without probable cause.
This is not a matter of National Security insomuch as a wealth transfer to the airline industry. But as you feel is a NS issue, I guess that it’s ok then.
I’m still waiting to find out if you consider it a violation of the 4th amendment.
#46–Chris==I agree with you. The details do matter. I can make the argument either way. What “should” happen if some guy goes to the local super market and strips down to his scivies at the check out line? Should he be arrested/detained or whatever as this guy was?
But this is not a private business venue–its a government function as we as citizens do have a right to “talk back” to the government. It bothers me you would equate the 3-5 minute disruption this incident caused with the 1000’s of hours of disruption the government search program is causing.
I personally would prefer to be scanned rather than patted down “but” I don’t trust the machines to be kept in safe operating order. Should anyone?
I balance the equities a bit more finely than you do and come down on the kids side. You balance the equities a bit harder than I do and come down on the governments side.
but the issue I was addressing was the analogy to entrapment. On that issue you are simply wrong==as discussed.
Words having meaning and a context. Its good to be able to tease separable issues out of a plate of spaghetti. Our master would approve.
#52
Entrapment? Wrong dude. You were talking to Hmmm, Right! at #40 about that.
I agree with you there. Different situation entirely.
Yeah, I’m more focused on public disruption than this guy’s right to act out. That is based on the specific environment. He was using the flight to make an ideological statement. Should the security personnel on the scene let him through and take the chance he disrupts his flight after boarding. He must have figured he’d get arrested. Maybe he’d have raised the stakes until he eventually was arrested.
I’d put his ass on the do not fly list, as well as giving him a ~$1000 ticket. It’s proportional and directed at the behavior.
In a less secure environment… I don’t know. I’ve always wondered what would happen if you wore undies, a shirt, and shoes into a store that had “No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service” signs posted. Not breaking any law and following the posted rules. If they kicked you out could you sue them?
#51
No violation. That’s what I was getting at in #2. There are some situations where you have a more limited set of rights, school being the classic case.
I think free expression and privacy rights are enormously important. There are just practical limits to everything.
If the this guy was standing in the non-secure area without his shirt on I’d be more sympathetic. Once he starts interfering with the operation of the screening process I think he should get the cuffs.
#53–Chris==right you are. Sorry bout that. I found your comments more attention worthy and got confused.
You aren’t breaking the law with no shoes and no shirt as you enter the store BUT if you don’t leave on their request then you are trespassing and indeed breaking the law.
I don’t think “what might happen next” heightens the violation at issue. So–should this type of free speech disturbance warrant a 1000 dollar fine and being put on the no fly list? Well, the law is what happens whether you like it or not. The key there would be for such a law/consequences to be equally applied to all. It might lead to the old saying that the best way to get a law repealed is to consistently enforce it?
It is all in the details–of which we don’t have.
Keep the good stuff coming—-and, of course: VOTE ALL “NO NEW TAXES” POLITICIANS OUT OF OFFICE and ALL PUBLIC DISTURBANCE FREE SPEECH ADVOCATES OUT OF MY LINE. I got important stuff to do!!!
Ha, ha.
# 50 chris said
If I’m missing something please tell me.
p.s. Details really DO matter.
Well, yes you are. This guy is challenging the legitimacy of the law he is accused of breaking along with the legitimacy of the charges.
An enforced “law” doesn’t mean it’s legal! The police, state or our current police state don’t get right to enforce or create laws by fiat.
Our police state acts like they can create laws by fiat, Constitution be damned. This fine PATRIOTIC AMERICAN is doing what every AMERICAN citizen should be doing, taking them to court!
It’s the jury of our peers that have say in such matters, not our police state.
#54, SCOTUS has ruled that pat-downs are only allowed for probable cause. They have also ruled that “administrative” searches (magnetometer) are legal as they “don’t delay more than a few seconds” such as in DWI roadblocks. I don’t trust the government to tell us the truth about whether the scanning machines are safe or not.
So, if we don’t submit to the potentially life-threatening scan, we have to give up our 4th amendment right before we can freely travel and engage in private commerce.
Pat-downs of everybody is really pushing the ruling.
The government should not be involved in this. The airlines should be handling it. It’s their ass on the line.
If you won’t draw the line here, where will you draw it? Wal-Mart? The State Fair? The County Fair? The School Fair? Wendy’s? I know you’ve tried to say they are not comparable, but IMNSHO they are damned near the same thing.
#56
“Our police state acts like they can create laws by fiat, Constitution be damned. This fine PATRIOTIC AMERICAN is doing what every AMERICAN citizen should be doing, taking them to court! ”
So is this different than an any other civil disobedience case because you agree with him, or should they all be treated equally?
If you are protesting something AND interfering with business\government operations you will get arrested. There is an obvious downside to allowing unlimited disruptive protests: unlimited disruption.
I also don’t think that any court is going to deny the gov the power to search people boarding an airplane.
Cops shouldn’t be assholes, but some are. That doesn’t suggest that policing is unnecessary or unconstitutional. I don’t think you can make the leap from saying TSA procedures can be more invasive than needed to produce decent security to the much more extreme idea that any search is unconstitutional.
Would you want to fly on a plane where nobody was searched, or could unilaterally exempt themselves from search?
#58, We aren’t saying we don’t want any security. You’re assuming there would be none should the TSA be shut down — it’s not an all or none proposition. We are saying the government shouldn’t be providing this for domestic flights (or at least I am, don’t want to speak for noname). International flights, yes. That’s the mandate in the Constitution — to protect our borders.
I would be willing to stretch the argument that the individual States should be responsible, but I strongly disagree with it being a federal government responsibility.
This is clearly a private function that should be handled by the airlines. They have a vested interest in maintaining the material security of their property.
Perhaps it’s a conspiracy with the insurance companies. They do have the “war” clauses in their policies. And this is a “War on Terror” so any damages wouldn’t be covered. Hmm.
#57–Lucidity Loser==you confuse civil with criminal law. Typical.
#58–Chris==noname didn’t say it was different and he didn’t say he agreed or disagreed. Saying he is fine and patriotic is close, but goes to a different issue.
Different issues need to be kept separate. If they were, then every cut and destruction to the social safety net the PUKES want to make could not gain traction by calling it job creation. Yes–separate issues all over the place interacting and entwined with all the others==but still separate.
Chris–you do “sound like” an advocate for public conformity to law, even to the point of disagreeing with the so very few who wish to challenge our sheepish conformity. Not concluding anything, but you might give your position a serious look.
What is FREEEEEEdom but someone else doing something you don’t like===even including disturbing your peace from time to time, even where that peace might be standing in line to get voluntarily groped?
Pro’s and Con’s to all we do. Should make our views more balanced than say a LIEberTARD might hold.
VOTE ALL “NO NEW TAXES” POLITICIANS OUT OF OFFICE. (No need to balance here===Today’s Pukes are all evil hypocrites.)