Michigan lawmaker introduces bill that would criminalize invasive TSA searches

[woo me with science]

http://www.examiner.com/libertarian-in-national/michigan-lawmaker-introduces-bill-that-would-criminalize-invasive-tsa-searches

Michigan lawmaker introduces bill that would criminalize invasive TSA searches

June 21, 2011 2:13 pm ET


....According to the Oakland Country Daily Tribune, State Rep. Tom McMillin has introduced legislation that would make it a misdemeanor for any TSA employee to “conduct an intrusive personal search on citizens without reasonable cause.”

The move was inspired not only by the Texas bill, which would prohibit any public servant from palpating another person’s “anus, sexual organ, buttocks, or breast” but by a recent incident during which TSA agents at a Detroit airport conducted an intrusive search on a 29-year-old special needs passenger and confiscated a toy the man carried everywhere with him as a “security blanket.”

The wording of McMillin’s bill seems to draw on language from the Texas measure, stating that TSA screeners shall not intentionally touch the clothed or unclothed breast, genitalia, buttocks or anus of that other individual except upon reasonable cause to believe that the individual may be concealing an item that is prohibited on that public property or on that mode of public transportation.

Those guilty of a violation could face penalties of up to 93 days in jail, a $500 fine, or both.

....
Like the Texas legislation, McMillin’s bill turns on the question of whether the so-called Supremacy Clause of the Constitution protects the actions of a federal agency, not just the laws made by the federal government, and whether that clause can be seen in some way as having preeminence over the Fourth Amendment.

....

[SDuderstadt]

1. "So-called Supremacy Clause"

Too funny.

[woo me with science]

2. SDuderstadt!

Fancy meeting you here! Already!

[SDuderstadt]

4. Serious advice...

If you guys want to get anywhere with this, your remedy would be in a Federal Appeals Court or with the US Congress.

I'm still chuckling at the "so-called Supremacy Clause" foolishness.

[sabrina 1]

10. And you've been told over and over again that the Supremecy

Clause does not apply to these egregious violations of Constitutional Rights.

[woo me with science]

11. I think this was for Dude, not me.

I am continually amazed at your patience in slapping down the same partisan apologia for destruction of our civil rights, over and over again.

Thanks for your informed and eloquent voice.

[sabrina 1]

14. Oops, sorry about that!

You are correct it was meant for Dude! lol!

[COLGATE4]

17. What court has said that the SupremAcy Clause of the Constitution

does not apply to this type of law???

[SDuderstadt]

19. It's the one in the OP's...

head.

[SDuderstadt]

22. Taking legal advice from you would be like...

taking advice about fidelity from Newt Gingrich.

[GoneOffShore]

13. Somebody loves them some TSA.

But we knew that.

[SDuderstadt]

15. Actually...

someone likes facts.

[Psephos]

3. Works for me. n/t

[SDuderstadt]

5. Yeah...

Nevermind that it plays right into the hands of RWers who think states should be able to nullify federal law.

[Psephos]

6. Look up the definition of the word "liberal" and you'll see it's not "RWers" who cherish liberty.

Fuck yes the states should be able to prevail in matters of protecting the liberties of their citizens - doubly so when the federal government has convenient amnesia about Constitutional protections.

What's so special about federal law, by the way, that you think it needs no checks and balances? Congress is infested by arrogant morons and sold-to-the-highest-bidder cynics.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

7. Cage match.Supremacy Clause v. Tenth Amendment!

Get yer popcorn right here!

:popcorn:

[SDuderstadt]

9. It's not a...

"cage match".

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[COLGATE4]

18. That's a stunning legal argument. Someone should try and make

it in court.

[SDuderstadt]

20. Read the Supremacy Clause of the...

Constitution, dude.

There's a reason why federal law trumps state law. There's also a reason why (the Incorporation Clause) the states are required to extend the guarantees of the Bill of Rights to their citizens. You seem to know little of this history and just assume the states will do the right thing. Ever heard of the Due Process Revolution?

[Matariki]

12. Excellent news. Hope it passes.

[Aerows]

16. I hope all 50 states pass this

There are lines that don't need to be crossed, and the pat-downs vs. naked scan has stepped right over the line and spat on it.

[woo me with science]

21. 69 replies to this thread, and only 20 have not been deleted. nt

[Kaleko]

23. Your thread has been dudelated,

sometimes also called "dudeleted". A phenomenon unique to DU that cannot be mentioned on the site itself without the post being deleted. Being dudelated, aka dudeleted, is a kind of primitive initiation rite and soon to be found as a verb in the Urban Dictionary.

Stay tuned... and watch this post being deleted ...

one ...

...two...

three...

[GoneOffShore]

25. It could also be groped by TSA fans.

Just keep your wits about you.

[woo me with science]

27. ...

:applause:

[Kaleko]

28. What? My post HAS NOT been deleted yet?

I'll be gosh darn dudelated if it doesn't happen soon!

[GoneOffShore]

26. You won't get alerted if you tow the TSA line.

[truebrit71]

24. Excellent! Let's hope this gets some legs too...about time the TSA gropings were ended..

...and at least a modicum of civil decency back into air travel again..