5 ms·

Seems like a lame outcome. If there is no admission or finding of wrong doing it really feels like there was no accountability whatsoever. The $25k is a round

by pmorici 12y ago

Seems like a lame outcome. If there is no admission or finding of wrong doing it really feels like there was no accountability whatsoever. The $25k is a rounding error and looks more like a token payment than anything else. They don't even have to make that paragraph part of their permanent police training. edit: How did they manage to drag this out for 5 years and still not have an actual judge or jury rule on this.

afiedler 12y ago
(Disclaimer: IANAL) Reading through the history of the case[1], it looks like the District Court ruled that the Federal TSA officers involved were entitled to qualified immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The reasoning was that the TSA followed appropriated procedures and wasn't responsible for the longer (few hour) detention by the Philly Police. In my opinion, that seems reasonable. The TSA only detained him for 15-30 mins to question him about the cards, then turned him over the the state police. After that ruling, the parties settled. I'm not sure why the case wasn't pursued further against the Philly Police. It could be that the case wasn't likely to succeed under Pennsylvania law, or maybe the ACLU wasn't interested in continuing to pursue it, since a Pennsylvania precedent wouldn't be a "worthwhile" expenditure of ACLU resources. [1]: https://www.aclu.org/national-security/george-v-tsa https://www.aclu.org/national-security/george-v-tsa
- njpg 12y ago
  (IANAL) The thing is the ACLU only has leverage against the Federal gov't if they pursue a settlement - the federal gov't doesn't want to see the agents deposed. Even if they have immunity, it'd make them look bad. If this went to trial, that leverage would be gone. So, the settlement deal gets them point 2 on that list, instead of just (potentially more) money.
- jessaustin 12y ago
  ...the TSA... wasn't responsible for the longer (few hour) detention by the Philly Police. This rings true to me. The TSA in general does not want people in custody. They know themselves that most of what they do is bullshit, so what would be the point? When I was delayed by TSA, they were eager to turn me over to LVPD, who, after a short conversation about the best way to deal with TSA bureaucracy and escape with minimal fines, told me, "if you run you can still catch your plane". Which I did. Author of TFA had the misfortune to deal with local police just as stupid as TSA, but without the built-in CYA aversion to arrests.
  - lisper 12y ago
    Minimal fines??? Why would you need to pay any fines?
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - fixermark 12y ago
      Because nobody gets out of Vegas with all the money they came in with. ;)
  - jmccree 12y ago
    The TSA "officers" do not have arrest power and are forbidden by policy from using force (to perhaps perform a citizens arrest if allowed in state for a state law violation), so they really don't have the ability to take anyone into "custody", hence calling for local police.
    - NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
      The reason why they don't have arrest powers is because splitting up the particular duties involved in infringing liberties makes it impossible to pin it on anyone. The TSA can blame it on the locals, the locals can blame it on the TSA, and 9 times out of 10 they don't even need to find a patsy for a scapegoat.
downandout 12y ago
If there is no admission or finding of wrong doing it really feels like there was no accountability whatsoever. Accountability for what, exactly? He wasn't arrested. He was detained. Police have wide latitude to detain people that are suspicious. I think any objective human being would say that a second look at him was warranted with those items in his bag. Whether he meant to or not, he pretty closely matched the profile of a radicalized US citizen. BTW, the title of this article isn't even accurate - he wasn't arrested - but then I guess "I was detained for a few hours because I raised several red flags at the airport" probably wouldn't make it to the front page of HN.
- travem 12y ago
  Being put in handcuffs and kept in a cell for several hours is not the same as being detained at a traffic stop to answer a few questions. And no, I don't think most objective human beings want to live in a police state where carrying arabic flash cards and a perfectly legal book is sufficient cause to be inconvenienced by the state in such a manner.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
    - ZanyProgrammer 12y ago
      The 9/11 hijackers had flash cards with them?
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
  - downandout 12y ago
    Legally, he was detained. He wasn't arrested. Those are two very different things.
    - s_q_b 12y ago

by pmorici 12y ago

afiedler 12y ago

(Disclaimer: IANAL) Reading through the history of the case[1], it looks like the District Court ruled that the Federal TSA officers involved were entitled to qualified immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The reasoning was that the TSA followed appropriated procedures and wasn't responsible for the longer (few hour) detention by the Philly Police. In my opinion, that seems reasonable. The TSA only detained him for 15-30 mins to question him about the cards, then turned him over the the state police. After that ruling, the parties settled. I'm not sure why the case wasn't pursued further against the Philly Police. It could be that the case wasn't likely to succeed under Pennsylvania law, or maybe the ACLU wasn't interested in continuing to pursue it, since a Pennsylvania precedent wouldn't be a "worthwhile" expenditure of ACLU resources. [1]: https://www.aclu.org/national-security/george-v-tsa https://www.aclu.org/national-security/george-v-tsa

njpg 12y ago
(IANAL) The thing is the ACLU only has leverage against the Federal gov't if they pursue a settlement - the federal gov't doesn't want to see the agents deposed. Even if they have immunity, it'd make them look bad. If this went to trial, that leverage would be gone. So, the settlement deal gets them point 2 on that list, instead of just (potentially more) money.
jessaustin 12y ago
...the TSA... wasn't responsible for the longer (few hour) detention by the Philly Police. This rings true to me. The TSA in general does not want people in custody. They know themselves that most of what they do is bullshit, so what would be the point? When I was delayed by TSA, they were eager to turn me over to LVPD, who, after a short conversation about the best way to deal with TSA bureaucracy and escape with minimal fines, told me, "if you run you can still catch your plane". Which I did. Author of TFA had the misfortune to deal with local police just as stupid as TSA, but without the built-in CYA aversion to arrests.
- lisper 12y ago
  Minimal fines??? Why would you need to pay any fines?
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - fixermark 12y ago
    Because nobody gets out of Vegas with all the money they came in with. ;)
- jmccree 12y ago
  The TSA "officers" do not have arrest power and are forbidden by policy from using force (to perhaps perform a citizens arrest if allowed in state for a state law violation), so they really don't have the ability to take anyone into "custody", hence calling for local police.
  - NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
    The reason why they don't have arrest powers is because splitting up the particular duties involved in infringing liberties makes it impossible to pin it on anyone. The TSA can blame it on the locals, the locals can blame it on the TSA, and 9 times out of 10 they don't even need to find a patsy for a scapegoat.

downandout 12y ago

If there is no admission or finding of wrong doing it really feels like there was no accountability whatsoever. Accountability for what, exactly? He wasn't arrested. He was detained. Police have wide latitude to detain people that are suspicious. I think any objective human being would say that a second look at him was warranted with those items in his bag. Whether he meant to or not, he pretty closely matched the profile of a radicalized US citizen. BTW, the title of this article isn't even accurate - he wasn't arrested - but then I guess "I was detained for a few hours because I raised several red flags at the airport" probably wouldn't make it to the front page of HN.

travem 12y ago
Being put in handcuffs and kept in a cell for several hours is not the same as being detained at a traffic stop to answer a few questions. And no, I don't think most objective human beings want to live in a police state where carrying arabic flash cards and a perfectly legal book is sufficient cause to be inconvenienced by the state in such a manner.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
  - ZanyProgrammer 12y ago
    The 9/11 hijackers had flash cards with them?
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
- downandout 12y ago
  Legally, he was detained. He wasn't arrested. Those are two very different things.
  - s_q_b 12y ago