3 ms·
Unbelievably disgusting behavior. "Unlike the government of Qatar, however, the US government hasn’t apologized, said that what happened was illegal (or would
by CamelCaseName 3y ago
Unbelievably disgusting behavior.
"Unlike the government of Qatar, however, the US government hasn’t apologized, said that what happened was illegal (or would be illegal if the complaint is proven to be true), or referred the TSA checkpoint staff for investigation and possible prosecution.
The TSA hasn’t even tried to dispute the truth and factual accuracy of the complaint.
Instead, the TSA has argued that, even if all of the allegations in Ms. Leuthauser’s complaint are true, the TSA and its employees have absolute impunity. Regardless of what “torts”, even rape, TSA checkpoint staff commit against travelers, the government claims that Federal courts have no jurisdiction to hear lawsuits or consider claims against them."
https://papersplease.org/wp/2022/12/06/tsa-argues-for-impunity-for-checkpoint-staff-who-rape-travelers/ https://papersplease.org/wp/2022/12/06/tsa-argues-for-impuni...
- Gibbon1 3y agoThat feels so gross it would nice if arguing that is contempt and earns the governments lawyer a month in a holding cell.
- macintux 3y agoThe last few years have made disbarment seem like a reasonable tool to use far more often than we do.
- theragra 3y agoBut who has?
- aidenn0 3y ago> "Unlike the government of Qatar, however, the US government hasn’t apologized, said that what happened was illegal (or would be illegal if the complaint is proven to be true), or referred the TSA checkpoint staff for investigation and possible prosecution. That's the really troubling thing. We can argue about civil immunity until we are blue in the face, but non-consensual body-cavity searches at airport screening locations (which, to clarify, are against TSA policy) should be treated as criminal.
- hiatus 3y agoIsn't this a standard way to structure a defense, to avoid a legal question by questioning standing?
- Joker_vD 3y agoAh, yes, the defense of the "I didn't kill him, well, you don't really have any evidence, okay, fine, even if I did, it was self-defense, so what" kind. I heard courts really don't like it though but IANAL.
- hiatus 3y agoI don't know how you arrived at that thought from what I wrote. Self-defense is an affirmative defense and has nothing to do with standing.