3 ms·

I think it's more or less established that flying on a plane isn't a right in the US. That's part of why the 4th amendment challenges to the TSA haven't been ef

I think it's more or less established that flying on a plane isn't a right in the US. That's part of why the 4th amendment challenges to the TSA haven't been effective.

hindsightbias 5y ago
Pilots have recourses, passengers as cargo do not.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
salawat 5y ago
See, I'm surprised that readings of the 10th Amendment aren't the end all be all answer to that statement. >The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
- notriddle 5y ago
  In what way does airline travel not count as interstate commerce?
  - kube-system 5y ago
    Only if you’re Southwest Airlines and the year is before 1979 ;)
  - salawat 5y ago
    Oh, if you want to play that equivocation, then the no-fly list is a ban from interstate commerce? That sounds a lot like starting to abridge freedom of assembly (over there, across state lines within a predefined time period). And lets be honest, the interstate commerce definition has been hogwash since case law got on the books stating that intra-state sale of grain could be regulated by Congress because of some indirect potential to affect markets across state lines; and such jurisprudence being utilized as a desperate lynchpin to try to keep individual states from unmaking the Federal level gun control framework. I can play word games and run rings around the English language too, however, my goal is not to stretch what's on paper to create pretense for interfering in every U.S. citizen's life in ways that make it easier for more and more liberties to be stripped, and for the actual force of law to get increasingly hidden from the plain English meaning of an a reasonably literate individual. Tired of the lazyness in applying 2nd plus order thinking to the spaghetti that is our legal code.

I think it's more or less established that flying on a plane isn't a right in the US. That's part of why the 4th amendment challenges to the TSA haven't been effective.

hindsightbias 5y ago

Pilots have recourses, passengers as cargo do not.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

salawat 5y ago

See, I'm surprised that readings of the 10th Amendment aren't the end all be all answer to that statement. >The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

notriddle 5y ago
In what way does airline travel not count as interstate commerce?
- kube-system 5y ago
  Only if you’re Southwest Airlines and the year is before 1979 ;)
- salawat 5y ago
  Oh, if you want to play that equivocation, then the no-fly list is a ban from interstate commerce? That sounds a lot like starting to abridge freedom of assembly (over there, across state lines within a predefined time period). And lets be honest, the interstate commerce definition has been hogwash since case law got on the books stating that intra-state sale of grain could be regulated by Congress because of some indirect potential to affect markets across state lines; and such jurisprudence being utilized as a desperate lynchpin to try to keep individual states from unmaking the Federal level gun control framework. I can play word games and run rings around the English language too, however, my goal is not to stretch what's on paper to create pretense for interfering in every U.S. citizen's life in ways that make it easier for more and more liberties to be stripped, and for the actual force of law to get increasingly hidden from the plain English meaning of an a reasonably literate individual. Tired of the lazyness in applying 2nd plus order thinking to the spaghetti that is our legal code.