TSA Could Ban Flights From Texas If State Passes Anti-Patdown Law - Polidicks

[url=http://consumerist.com/2011/05/tsa-could-ban-flights-to-texas-if-state-passes-anti-patdown-law.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter]The Consumerist[/url] [quote]A showdown is in the works over an anti-patdown law, which the Texas House of Representatives recently approved by a unanimous vote. Texas legislators say the rule is needed because existing laws "let government employees fondle innocent women, children and men." The Department of Justice has sent a letter to Texas legislative leaders warning that the rule would run counter to federal laws, and could cause the Transportation Security Administration to "cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew."[/quote] [quote]In its letter to state officials, U.S. Attorney John E. Murphy warned: HB 137 would conflict directly with federal law. The practical import of the bill is that it would threaten criminal prosecution of Transportation Security Administration personnel who carry out the security procedures required under federal statutes and TSA regulations passed to implement those statutes. Those officials cannot be put to the choice of risking criminal prosecution or carrying out their federal duties. Under the Supremacy Cause of the United States Constitution, Texas has no authority to regulate federal agents and employees in the performance of their federal duties or to pass a statute that conflicts with federal law. If HR 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute. Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew.[/quote] So either Texans are trapped in Texas, or if DOJ backs down, they have fondle free flights. [b]update[/b] [url=Texas Lawmaker: Pat Down Bill Is Dead]click2houston[/url] [quote]AUSTIN, Texas -- A Texas senator who wants to prohibit intrusive searches during airport security pat downs said Wednesday his bill is likely dead after a threat from federal officials to close airports if the measure passed. Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, blamed Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst for turning senators against his bill Tuesday night because federal Transportation Security Agents don't like the measure. Patrick said he originally had the other 30 senators signed on to support the bill, but he lost votes because Dewhurst caved to pressure from the federal government. "I don't cave in to heavy-handed threats by the federal government," a visibly frustrated Patrick said after he pulled his bill down without taking a vote. "No one is against this bill except the federal government and the lieutenant governor." The measure, already approved by the House, would make it illegal for anyone conducting searches to intentionally touch private parts under or through clothing. It also prohibits searches "that would be offensive to a reasonable person." 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 making direct contact with private areas.[/quote]

This has already been resolved. Texas has given into the threat and are not enacting the law. [release]Texas state lawmakers have shelved a bill to outlaw controversial airport pat-downs. The legislation, which would have made it illegal for Transportation Security Administration agents to perform hand searches at airport security checkpoints unless there was probable cause, was approved by the Texas House. But the U.S. attorney general's office threatened to cancel flights to Texas if the bill passed, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram reported this week, and that was enough to give Texas senators cold feet. Under the proposed legislation, TSA agents would have been charged with a misdemeanor crime and received a $4,000 fine and one year in jail. If it had been approved and Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) had signed it, it would have been the first state law restricting TSA's security techniques. TSA argued the proposed legislation was unconstitutional, and in a letter from U.S. District Attorney for Western Texas John Murphy to senators, the Department of Justice said the law could have unintended consequences. "This office, as well as the Southern, Northern and Eastern District of Texas United States Attorneys, would like to advise you of the significant legal and practical problems that will be created if this bill becomes law," Murphy wrote in a letter dated May 24. "If HR 1937 were enacted, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute," Murphy's letter continued. "Unless or until such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or a series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of the passengers and crew." The sponsor of the bill that passed the Texas House, state Rep. David Simpson (R), called the DOJ letter "a brazen show of disregard for the dignity and the constitutional rights of American citizens. "Either Texas backs off and continues to let government employees fondle innocent women, children and men as a condition of travel, or the TSA will cancel Texas flights," Simpson's office said in a statement this week. "The federal government showed its willingness to bully the State of Texas if attempts to protect passengers from being forced to give up constitutional rights are not dropped. "Instead of threatening to shut down flights in Texas, why doesn’t the TSA just show us their statutory authority to grope or ogle our private parts," Simpson asked in response to TSA's claim that the Texas bill would have violated the Constitution's supremacy clause.[/release] [url]http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/tsa/163343-texas-tsa-pat-down-ban-killed-after-justice-dept-warns-flights-would-be-grounded[/url]

[QUOTE=Pepin;30067515]This has already been resolved. Texas has given into the threat and are not enacting the law.[/QUOTE] Oh, well shit.

That's ridiculous. Yeah lets shut down flights to four of the biggest cities in the Country! that will show em'. It's not like it's going to affect business/government related travel or anything!

I don't think the TSA should have that kind of authority. To think that they can stop flights.

TSA was obviously bluffing they wouldn't shout down Houston and dallas

wow TSA really wants to touch people's genitals [editline]26th May 2011[/editline] how do they have the power to do this anyway

Is Texas taking them seriously? Do you think the government would honestly do that?

Instead of folding Texas should have just said "okay, well then we'll make it illegal for the TSA to operate at all in our state".

Could they have even done done that? All planes coming from other countries aren't checked by the TSA, will they ban them too?

I thought Texas was like, the big badass state with tons of guns that nobody pushed around?

TSA is really overstepping their bounds with nothing to back it but hot air. They're not federal officers, the air marshals are, but the TSA screeners themselves are glorified mall cops with latex gloves to feel up on people. Does it really matter anyway? A suicide bomb on a plane would kill a hundred or so people, more if it's a large aircraft. Detonating a bomb in the crouded security checkpoint would easily kill a massive amount of people too. What are they going to do, start screening people at their houses if they're planning on going to the airport? :v:

[QUOTE=Zeke129;30070397]I thought Texas was like, the big badass state with tons of guns that nobody pushed around?[/QUOTE] maybe they're planning to revolt :clint:

I just watched an interview and a Texas congressman said they are actually considering passing the bill regardless of the threat. He said that the reaction to the threat was more impulsive and that the congress is likely to call their bluff. I am under the assumption that the TSA will stop some flights, but as long as the Texas congress keeps a poker face and don't fold, that they will win.

Pass it, Texas. Do something smart for a change and TSA will back down.

TSA just stop the patdowns. Stop acting like faggots. Unless a girl pats me down, Then i shall never let anyone else touch me. Also banning flights from texas? HaHa. Your funny TSA!

Why didn't they just inform TSA that if they attempt that, then they would ban them from their state or something. Can't they do that? I am not a specialist in laws and governments and such.

I thought you were cool Texas It's not too late

Pfft, what a bunch of pussies.

This just in British Air flights are up.

good to know that the bureaucracy is working so efficiently nowadays

I never thought I find myself rooting for the TSA, but there is a system for dealing with constitutional issues. Passing laws that get TSA agents in trouble for doing their job isn't the right way to go about making a change. I have little doubt that the TSA would shut down flights out of Texas; if the threats they perceive are real, Texas would be a major weakness and would present a national security threat. Vital business could still occur through telecommunications, rail, or via the roads.

[QUOTE=ChristopherB;30075732]I never thought I find myself rooting for the TSA, but there is a system for dealing with constitutional issues. Passing laws that get TSA agents in trouble for doing their job isn't the right way to go about making a change. I have little doubt that the TSA would shut down flights out of Texas; if the threats they perceive are real, Texas would be a major weakness and would present a national security threat. Vital business could still occur through telecommunications, rail, or via the roads.[/QUOTE] it would still fuck things up for the worse

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;30075929]it would still fuck things up for the worse[/QUOTE] I'm not sure what you mean. Are you referring to the potential affects of the flights out of Texas being shut down?

[QUOTE=Billiam;30068396]Is Texas taking them seriously? Do you think the government would honestly do that?[/QUOTE] Texas and the feds aren't exactly on the best of terms right now....hell, Houston Space Flight Center got snubbed for one of the Space Shuttles! Instead one went to New York City, wtf?

I guess it's because the TSA likes to fondle people's genitials, but that's just not as good as the Texas Hold Em'.

This threatens interstate commerce. The feds could be all over the TSA's asses if someone could appeal to the Supreme Court.

[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;30099989]This threatens interstate commerce. The feds could be all over the TSA's asses if someone could appeal to the Supreme Court.[/QUOTE] When was the last time the feds took the feds to court?

[QUOTE=ChristopherB;30075732]I never thought I find myself rooting for the TSA, but there is a system for dealing with constitutional issues. Passing laws that get TSA agents in trouble for doing their job isn't the right way to go about making a change. I have little doubt that the TSA would shut down flights out of Texas; if the threats they perceive are real, Texas would be a major weakness and would present a national security threat. Vital business could still occur through telecommunications, rail, or via the roads.[/QUOTE] I don't think states fighting unconstitutional laws is all that abhorrent. The federal government is not good at regulating the federal government, this can be seen by bullshit supreme court decisions and things like the drug war, for example, which states are actively fighting right now (and i don't disagree with that one bit). They should have just made a law kicking the TSA out, i agree putting the workers in jeopardy of being convicted of a crime for a policy they don't control is a little silly.

The constitution was actually supposed to allow the states more power to disobey federal law. The issue now is that the federal government has too much power and can use just about any threat to make a state do things their way. A lot of the threats have to do with funding, although now it seems to have extended to travel. During the age of slavery, the people who hid run away slaves were supposed to be prosecuted in the courts, and by law they would get quite a penalty. But instead the judges in the north ignored federal law and refused to penalize these people. They'd have a trial and everything, and then they'd just find them not guilty.