7 ms·
Appeals Court Caves to TSA Over Nude Body Scanners
- gsibble 14y agoIt's sad to see the executive branch forcing the judiciary into an awkward position. What exactly is the judge going to do? Fine DHS/TSA? Where will that money go? Right back into the treasury where it came from. Ugh. TSA makes me sick.
- jerrya 14y agoI don't know what an Appeals Court can do, and I would like to know. It almost certainly could provide the relief the plaintiffs were asking for, right? Can it: * provide a writ of mandamus stopping the machines until the ordered report is provided? * tell the TSA 19 months is too long, they have 90 more days to comply? As it was, IIRC, the TSA said 19 months, the judge said 20 months!
- roc 14y ago> "What exactly is the judge going to do?" Hold those in charge personally responsible. Find them in contempt. Lock them up. Go as far up the executive chain as necessary. Have the civilian police deactivate/seize any scanners until the TSA falls into compliance. The TSA has definitely forced an awkward situation. But it's not one without recourse. The government is always accountable to the people and must obey the law. If the country paid anything more than lip service to the rule of law and personal liberty, these actions would have already been taken or at least credibly threatened to force this issue along.
- rayiner 14y agoDon't be dramatic. The US government is very accountable as far as governments go. The judge hasn't held anyone in contempt yet because foot-dragging isn't really an egregious disrespect to the court in a procedural battle like this one. What the judge is ordering the agency to do is have a public notice & comment on regulations governing the use of these scanners. Writing up proper notice takes a lot of time because any defects in the notice set up a later legal challenge. They're late on this, but agencies always are.
- roc 14y ago> "They're late on this, but agencies always are." Months-late could be attributable to the somewhat understandable slow wheels of over-careful i-dotting and t-crossing. But we're going on years-late. And the court had to order the TSA to give so much as a status update after 13 months of failure to comply and official silence. That's well into egregious disrespect.
- verelo 14y ago> "Don't be dramatic. The US government is very accountable as far as governments go." Its fairly responsible, despite a few large events, however this is one issue that the US is not grasping the magnitude of. The TSA is not just impacting your own citizens, think about foreigners visiting, what a great first impression! I've stopped flying through SFO or LAX whenever i visit Sydney or Toronto. I now go through Vancouver every time. It costs me more, but i'm tired of US immigration / TSA shenanigans.
- rayiner 14y agoI agree, TSA is a very egregious agency that seems to have been let loose like a bull in a china store. But it's unusually bad as far as federal agencies go.
- joering2 14y agoif you live in the US, this is more correct: The people are always accountable to the government and must obey the law [set forth by the latter].
- rayiner 14y agoThere are things judges can do that they don't in practice. A common punishment to foot-dragging is to force the agency to pay attorneys' fees for plaintiffs. This comes out of the agencies litigation budgets, which makes it harder for them to fight other challenges and tends to get results.
- mtgx 14y agoUS should have a different agency that takes comments and complaints about the TSA and then sends a periodical report to Congress about it. From my understanding, right now the complaints are sent to TSA themselves? That's pretty much pointless then.
- nathanb 14y agoAre you sure that's accountable and transparent enough? Perhaps we should establish a third agency to handle complaints regarding the second agency and ensure that everything is aboveboard.
- cpeterso 14y agoWe could have one agency to plan the TSA's mission, a second to carry out the plan, and a third to review complaints.
- skermes 14y agoYou joke, but http://www.improbable.com/ig/winners/#ig2012 http://www.improbable.com/ig/winners/#ig2012 LITERATURE PRIZE: The US Government General Accountability Office, for issuing a report about reports about reports that recommends the preparation of a report about the report about reports about reports. Never try to out-do the government at bureaucratic recursion.
- camiller 14y agoThe do have: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/ http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/
- ChuckMcM 14y agoAnd I would encourage you to use http://PostCongress.io http://PostCongress.io to express your displeasure to your representative.
- flyt 14y agoSeriously. We should have a Government Accountability Office to keep an eye on things like this.
- scythe 14y agoI thought the TSA's argument as described at the end of the article was patently absurd ("ever-evolving threats"). Did they actually get away with saying that? If there is any decency in the world, that wouldn't stand with SCOTUS.
- cpeterso 14y agoI always opt-out of the scanners when I fly, but my estimate is that less than 0.5% of other people opt-out. 1 in 200! Most people are too impatient or uninformed to care about privacy or potential health risks.
- enraged_camel 14y agoDo we actually have any conclusive evidence that these scanners are harmful? I thought all the "potential health risks" were just speculative.
- josephlord 14y agoYes but the absence of health risks is pretty speculative too and based on the assumption that the particular machine you are stepping into is functioning as designed. Do you feel lucky?
- jlgreco 14y agoI think all programmers should know that even medical grade equipment can go terribly wrong (Therac-25 anyone?). The fact that this stuff isn't medical grade, isn't being operated by people who understand the risks, and isn't allowed to be inspected makes me feel very unlucky.
- CamperBob2 14y agoisn't being operated by people who understand the risks This is the key point as far as I'm concerned. In what other profession am I allowed to use X-ray machines on the general public without any training whatsoever?
- DrStalker 14y agoMad scientist?
- 14y ago
- alttag 14y agoOne of the interesting (to me) items in the article is that it framed the use of body scanners as clearly an agency (administrative) decision, rather than a legal (that is, codified) one. For rule-making authority to have the force of law, the 90-day comment period is mandated ... does that mean the decision to apply these scanners isn't enforceable (and thus, litigable)? TSA has seemingly worked around this, as there is no aggrieved party (and thus, no standing), due to their opt-out provisions. That seems doubly wrong, and disrespectful of the legal process.
- ims 14y agoAdministrative decisions can often be made without corresponding rulemaking actions. Even when a rule is made the 90 day comment period (normally 60 days after the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and 30 after the Final Rule) is more of a guideline. You could call it strongly encouraged by several Executive Orders, most recently E.O. 13563.
- jksmith 14y agoIf you have to raise your hands over your head like you're some kind of perp, at least throw two bird fingers while they're taking the xray. You want them to see that you don't have any explosive devices on your middle fingers.