The current no fly list maintained by the TSA and that we are all subject to has been declared unconstitutional by a federal judge.
http://news.yahoo.com/u-federal-judge-rules-no-fly-list-violates-183546517.html
This will no doubt be appealed but it could make life more interesting for awhile. Now maybe a good Lebanese friend will be able to travel without constant check in problems.
If the judge based her decision on the 14th Amendment and the constitution is interpreted literally, the no fly list is only unconstitutional as it applies to US citizens. Is your Lebanese friend a naturalized citizen?
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."
Of course the Federal Govt is not a state, nor does the constitution expressly grant the Fed. Govt the power to maintain a no-fly list, so this ruling guarantees employment for constitutional lawyers.
Frank,
This is an interesting development, which brings up some interesting possibilities. As Lee pointed out, this only applies to U.S. citizens. I wonder if someone who was previously on a U.S. no-fly list was now able to depart the U.S., would they be hindered from returning home due to the no-fly list of another country? Are the no-fly lists of all countries harmonized?
Do the other countries have no fly lists? I didn't think so. It is my understanding that the no fly list only pertains to US domestic flights, and in/out bound international flights. My Lebanese friend's family has been in the US longer than my German grandparents. His problem is his name, common Lebanese sir name (think Johnston, Williams, Smith) and a fairly common first name. Probably a dozen thought to be potential terrorists running around under that name. But - just cannot be too careful, can we? And from what I have read from other sources there is almost no vetting of any name that gets on the list. It is a mess.
The UK runs what is in effect its own no fly list as does Canada, although each has a different name.
I know it is a matter of opinion but I don't know why you would assume that it would most likely be overturned. I am sure it will go to the S court. Just today the SC came down hard on the protection of individual privacy rights. In someways this is in the same area of individual rights to freedom of movement which is well established. I know you like to quote things but just because the government says it is so doesn't make so. Is there an office you can call to see if your name is on the list? Of not. So if you don't know if you are on the list, then how can you get off the list. And if you are being hassled or denied boarding because you name is similar to name on the list that may or may not be a true terrorists? How does that work? It doesn't. The whole idea of a list makes very little sense. If you screen everyone, the pilot is locked in, maybe an armed security on board, and passengers are not going to be docile anymore so what is a terrorist to do once he gets on board. Very little. I think this is long overdue.
What's a terrorist to do? So many creative things have been tried since 9/11, including bombs in underwear. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like the national security card trumps anything else, especially when applied to something specific like air passage, which has a long documented history of attempted terrorist acts.
I'm not in favor of no-fly lists except for people taking flash photos in museums and churches.
And the Patriot Act IS constitutional? Just saying.
"like" for Claudia. Most of what's been done since 9/11 in the name of security/anti-terrorism has flirted with unconstitutionality and abridging of personal rights and freedoms. Also, just saying.
And the Patriot Act IS constitutional?
Your Supreme Court seems to think it is.
""Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.""
Benjamin Franklin
But 97½% of those on the no fly list are not US citizens, so the 14th Amendment does not cover them explicitly.
