Author Archives: Michael Froomkin

TSA Announces Policy of Viewpoint Discrimination

TSA: TSA Announces Enhancements to Airport ID Requirements to Increase Safety

Beginning Saturday, June 21, 2008 passengers that willfully refuse to provide identification at security checkpoint will be denied access to the secure area of airports. This change will apply exclusively to individuals that simply refuse to provide any identification or assist transportation security officers in ascertaining their identity.

This new procedure will not affect passengers that may have misplaced, lost or otherwise do not have ID but are cooperative with officers. Cooperative passengers without ID may be subjected to additional screening protocols, including enhanced physical screening, enhanced carry-on and/or checked baggage screening, interviews with behavior detection or law enforcement officers and other measures.

Under the law that created TSA, the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, the TSA administrator is responsible for overseeing aviation security (P.L. 107-71) and has the authority to establish security procedures at airports (49 C.F.R. § 1540.107). Passengers that fail to comply with security procedures may be prohibited from entering the secure area of airports to catch their flight (49 C.F.R. § 1540.105(a)(2).

This initiative is the latest in a series designed to facilitate travel for legitimate passengers while enhancing the agency's risk-based focus – on people, not things. Positively identifying passengers is an important tool in our multi-layered approach to security and one that we have significantly bolstered during the past 18 months.

I take this to mean that a person who says, “I have not lost my ID but contest your right to demand it” will be deemed “uncooperative.”

If that supposition is correct, then this is both unconstitutional and underhanded.

It is unconstitutional because — if my supposition is correct — it is viewpoint discrimination: the same person will get different treatment based on whether they acknowledge in principle that they don't have rights.

It is underhanded, because TSA has prevailed in a number of court cases, not least Gilmore v. Gonzales, based in part on their saying that people who wouldn't show ID could still fly, they'd just be searched more. (“Gilmore had a meaningful choice. He could have presented identification, submitted to a search, or left the airport. That he chose the latter does not detract from the fact that he could have boarded the airplane had he chosen one of the other two options. “)

Having won the cases, they are doing a takeback.

On the other hand, I guess they get one point for being honest about it.

(spotted via Emergent Chaos, Praises for the TSA)

Posted in Civil Liberties | 4 Comments

Shocking News: Alan Swan Killed in a Car Accident

I've just received the shocking news that my colleague Alan Swan was killed in a car accident this morning. Here's the email — it's all I know at present:

On behalf of Dean Dennis Lynch, I write with great sadness to inform you that Professor Alan Swan died in a car accident this morning. His wife, Mary Jo, was also in the car and was seriously injured and is presently in intensive care. She is not able to take calls or receive visitors.

We do not have other details at the moment but will follow up as soon as we have other information.

Please keep the Swan family in your thoughts and prayers.

Alan had been coping bravely with a very serious and apparently terminal illness for some time, but this is still very sudden and unexpected.

Posted in U.Miami | 1 Comment

Friday McCain Bashing (Embarassement of Riches Edition)

These are only the highlights of the past week's bounty:

I can't keep up with this.

Posted in Politics: McCain | 2 Comments

Must Read

Rick Perlstein, The Meaning of Box 722 in light of Sen. Obama's historic victory this week.

Best thing you'll read online today. Heck, maybe this week, and it's quite a week.

This excerpt from the start doesn't really do the essay justice, as it picks up steam as it goes along, but at least it sets the stage,

When I started researching NIXONLAND I knew the congressional elections of 1966 would form a crucial part of the narrative. They'd never really been examined in-depth before, but by my reckoning they were the crucial hinge that formed the ideological alignment we live in now.

In 1964, Lyndon Johnson—and, apparently, liberalism—achieved such a gigantic landslide victory that it appeared to pundits the Republican Party would be forever consigned to the outer darkness if it ever entertained a Goldwater-style conservative law-and-order platform again. Two years later, most of the new liberal congressmen swept in on LBJ's coattails—the congressional class that gave us Medicare and Medicaid, the first serious environmental legislation, National Endowments for the Humanities and Arts, Head Start, the Voting Rights Act, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the end of racist immigration quotas, Legal Aid, and more—was swept out on a tide of popular reaction.

That reaction, I hope I demonstrate effectively in NIXONLAND, rested on two pillars: terror at the wave of urban rioting that began in the Watts district of Los Angeles; and terror at the prospect of the 1966 civil rights bill passing, which, by imposing an ironclad federal ban on racial discrimination in the sale and rental of housing—known as “open housing”—would be the first legislation to impact the entire nation equally, not just the South. (What that reaction most decidedly did not rest on: fear and loathing of “hippies,” which were unknown, except in California, to most of the nation until 1967; or antiwar activists, which were not associated with either party, because Republicans and Democrats had about an equal number of hawks and doves in 1966.)

When I learned that the papers of Senator Paul Douglas were at the Chicago Historical Society (as it was known then; now it's cursed with the decidedly more prosaic name the Chicago History Museum), I decided to make Douglas's 1966 loss to Republican Charles Percy a key case study for my hypothesis.

Got anything as good to recommend? Please note it in the comments.

Posted in Politics: US | 1 Comment

Is Mapstats Dead?

Mapstats, from Blogflux, the people who provide that nice little list of locations of recent blog visitors that runs in my right margin, seem to have had some serious problems this week.

For a while their widget was holding up the rendering of this page. Then that got better, but the actual cities being reported on the right didn't change for almost a day. (It is possible I messed up the code in some way while trying to fix the problem, but I don't think so.) Then it went back to not rendering.

So I've killed it off at least temporarily and sent an email asking what is going on. Pity. I liked it.

Posted in Discourse.net | 2 Comments

The Girl Effect

A big chunk of the development agenda summarized in a video:

Great stuff from The Girl Effect.

Posted in Econ & Money | 1 Comment