Transportation Safety Administration Screening at US Airports - Research Paper Example

? Transportation Safety Administration Screening at U. S. Airports The Bill of Rights and the 4th Amendment 2001 and Now Donna Purcell Order 661135 Abstract The following research includes several pieces of information that highlight the current airport regulations as well as regulations that were required when the TSA took over airport security in 2001. Detailed information is shown concerning procedures associated with the AIT machine and pat downs. Laws and cases concerning airline search and seizure procedures are covered in U. S. v. Davis of 1973 as well as the 1986 upholding case. Positive feedback and opposition to the current security laws and the conclusion raises the question of security versus freedom in airport security and does it infringe on the 4th amendment. Keywords: 4th Amendment, AIT Scanner, Pat downs. Transportation Safety Administration Screening at U. S. Airports The Bill of Rights and the 4th Amendment 2001 and Now Introduction: September 11, 2001 will never be forgotten by anyone who is an American citizen. It became a day that the “light came on” for many people who had before taken security for granted. To the major portion of Americans, terrorism was something that happened in other countries, never their own. A total of 19 terrorists were able to evade security checkpoints and personnel and board four commercial airline planes. The results of that day were a “wake up call” for security in America but particularly for airline security. (Taylor; Steedman, 2003). After 9/11 security professionals have been seen as a major defense to managing the terrorism threat. The security industry has seen a boom after September 11, 2001. The airline industry has been the fastest to upgrade their security measures, since the hijackings occurred on commercial airlines. Immediately following the attacks, President Bush poured $20 billion dollars into intelligence and security. The airlines had to enact new security measures so that people would feel safe flying. Stricter background checks and heavier security for baggage checks were the first placement measures. (Taylor; Steedman, 2003). The following research covers the new airline laws, the TSA and how it effects the Bill of Rights and the 4th Amendment. The New Security Measures: The new security laws were put into place on November 1, 2001. They needed to be in place before the heightened traveling season of Thanksgiving and Christmas of 2001. On November 19, 2001 Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA). The Homeland Security Act was passed on November 25, 2002 and the TSA was moved to the Department of Homeland Security, which had formerly been directly under the Department of Transportation. (Taylor; Steedman, 2003). Security officers are very important in an airport that caters to millions of people traveling from different parts of the world. They are employed to assure the safety of assets; “they are on the front line.” (Taylor; Steedman, 2003). A security officer takes his position more personal and is able to detect little things that others would not normally see by observation. These officers are well versed on baggage checks, vehicle checks, screening passengers and personnel and operating detection equipment. Shortly after the TSA was formed, 65,000 new federal employees were hired. (Taylor; Steedman, 2003). They were offered higher wages and better benefits, and increased training from 12 hours to 100 hours on all baggage and passenger screeners. (Blalock; Kadiyali; Simon, 2007). The immediate short term upgrades to security included criminal background checks on 750,000 airport employees, screening of all checked baggage with whatever equipment was available. This included x-ray machines, personal hands on inspections, presence of more air marshals on board, and prescreening of suspicious passengers with the FBI. By 2003 5,000 more air marshals were placed on domestic and international flights. Long-term upgrades included 28,000 airport baggage screeners being equipped with explosive detection machines, Trusted-passenger programs were put into place, and passenger identity technologies for screening. It is noted that focus was placed on baggage and security of the passengers on the planes. The Department of Homeland Security was quoted as saying, “airport screeners have, since February 2002, intercepted more than 7.8 million items, including 1,437 firearms, 2.3 million knives, and 49,331 box cutters – the terrorists’ weapon of choice on 9/11.” (Taylor: Steedman, 2003). Requirements to board a plane as of November 2001 required a government issued I.D. or an electronic boarding pass or paper one. For flight check in you must have a picture I.D. such as a driver’s license, passport, or other government-issued I.D. The reservations for your flight have to be made in the exact name that is listed on the I.D. If the name is different or has recently changed, you will need to have documentation to that effect. For persons entering the US, proof has to be shown in visas; I-94’s, parole letters, admission stamps, or alien resident cards. Passengers who did not have checked luggage could go directly to security checkpoints. Baggage had to be kept with passengers at all times; if not, they may be destroyed by airport security. Canada, the United Kingdom, the European Union as well as the US imposed liquid carry on restrictions. No sharp instruments were allowed on the person or in luggage, including letter openers, knives, box cutters, scissors, etc. or they would be confiscated. (travelsense.org., 2001). This also included razor blades that could be hidden in shoes. On January 2002 all airports had to use one of four methods for baggage detection, explosion detection systems (EDS), explosion trace detection (ETD) machines, bomb-sniffing dogs, or manual searching of bags. These procedures did not exclude full body wand scanners and pat-down searches. (Macsata, 2010). By January 2004, TSA had put 1,100 EDS machines and 7,200 ETD machines in airports nationwide. (Blalock, et. al, 2007). The AIT Machines, Pat Downs, 4th Amendment: The latest technology began to appear in airports in 2007. The AIT or Advanced Imaging Technology, known as the “nude” body scanner was deployed to 78 airports across the country. In an article by Doug Mataconis, who is a lawyer in Virginia, 500 more of the AIT machines are to be in place by the end of 2011. In an article by Joe Brancatelli in 2010, 1800 full body scanners will be in operation by 2014. (Brancatelli, 2010). The Electronic Privacy Information Center asked the court to block using the devices contending that they are unconstitutional, a privacy invasion, ineffective and unhealthy to passengers. The petition argued that the AIT machine violates a persons’ 4th Amendment because it is more extreme than is necessary for the detection of weapons or explosives. In this case the Supreme Court upheld that the act of screening passengers in the airport is an “administrative search” and the goal is to protect the public from a terrorist act. The court further added that the AIT scanner is capable of detecting and foiling attempts to carry liquid explosives aboard a plane, therefore, they are allowed. (Mataconis, 2011). The 4th Amendment to the Bill of Rights reads, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized.” (Boardingarea.com, 2010). There has also been controversy over pat downs, as Steven Frischling points out in an article in November of 2010. He claims that the TSA’s pat downs may violate the 4th amendment on the surface, but that the 9th circuit court ruled on search of passengers in airports back as early as 1973. In 1973 the case of U.S. v. Davis 482 F.2nd 893, 908, the court points out that the wording is what gives the TSA the power to search as they see fit. The wording states, “noting that airport screenings are considered to be administrative searches because they are conducted as part of a general regulatory scheme, where the essential administrative purpose is to prevent the carrying of weapons or explosives aboard aircraft.” (Frischling, 2010). The U.S. v. Davis goes even further with the court ruling to say that, “an administrative search is allowed if no more intrusive or intensive than necessary, in light of current technology, to detect weapons or explosives, confined in good faith to that purpose, and passengers may avoid the search by electing not to fly.” This ruling was held up in 1986 as well with the case of U. S. v. Pulido-Baquerizo 800 F 2nd 899, 901. The ruling is stated as, “To judge reasonableness, it is necessary to balance the right to be free of intrusion with society’s interest in safe air travel.” (Frischling, 2010). These cases as well as the laws give the Department of Homeland Security very liberal legal latitude when performing searches in airports. The TSA has taken steps to protect the privacy of passengers as well by distorting the image created by the AIT machine. They also delete the image as soon as the passenger passes inspection. It is also noted that any passenger can decline being screened by the AIT machine for a pat down instead. This gives the passenger the option of deciding which method is less invasive. If you opt for the pat down, you will also be given a choice of same sex screener and you can have the procedure done in a private room with a traveling companion present. (Brancatelli, 2010). Macsata contends that the government and companies that manufacture the full body scanners are the only people that actually stand behind the scanners, (Macsata, 2010) however, a CBS News Poll in 2010 contends that 81 percent of Americans support their use. This poll runs parallel to the Gallup pole, which claims positive feedback for the full body scanners. (Brancatelli, 2010). Commercial pilots, security experts, and frequent travelers are among the opposition as they claim the scanners are not effective. The pilots have been excluded from full-body scanners, however, they are still required to be subjected to x-ray machines and extensive identification. (Brancatelli, 2010). Macsata also notes in his article that the full body scanners are not being used at some airports during high holiday travel. He also notes that all other industrialized nations have ceased having passengers take off their shoes. It seems that in the Middle East the Israeli approach to security is profiling and interviews. This is not associated with race or ethnics, it has to do with behaviors. He notes that there has not been one terrorist attack from any Israeli airports. (Macsata, 2010). Conclusion: The current research covers from 2001 to the present concerning airport security procedure and use of full body scanners and pat downs. While there has been considerable controversy about the TSA and the extent of its procedures, the courts still rule for the use of full body scanners and pat down procedures. It is noted that commercial airports are not required by law to use government screeners as the 2001 laws do allow airports to contract with private firms. Among the 450 or so commercial airports nationwide, only 16 have chosen to use the government screeners for security. The others have chosen to contract with private security firms for their security needs. (Brancatelli, 2010). Before 9/11 the security was in the hands of the airlines and they did use private firms, however, their tract records were terrible. Private security machines missed weapons and other objectionable objects. It has been noted that the turnover in the workforce averaged 200 percent at Boston’s Logan Airport. This location is where two of the hijackers began on 9/11. Most Americans feel that the security at the airports is a government responsibility. Since no U. S. aircraft has been hijacked or attacked successfully since 2001, the TSA and the general public see this as being “safe.” Other things that give the TSA a positive endorsement are stronger cockpit doors that remain locked and pilots being able to carry guns in the cockpit. Public and stewardess awareness has played an important part in successful airline security as well. (Brancatelli, 2010). While airport security continues to be a controversial subject, it seems polls indicate the general public is willing to adhere to scanners and pat downs in order to be safe. Benjamin Franklin is quoted as saying, “He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.” (Macsata, 2010). So the question remains, does the extra scrutiny infringe upon the 4th amendment? Or is it just an inconvenience that we can tolerate for a little piece of mind? References: Airport Security Regulations. Web. 04 April 2012. http://travelsense.org/. Blalock, Garrick; Kadiyali, Vrinda; Simon, Daniel H. 30 April 2007. The Impact of Post 9/11 Airport Security Measures on the Demand of Air Travel. Web. 04 April 2012. http://dyson.cornell.edu/. Brancatelli, Joe. 23 November 2010. A TSA Primer: X-rays, Body Scans, and the Terror Fight. Web. 04 April 2012. http://portfolio.com/business-travel/. Frischling, Steven. 20 November 2010. The Blog for Those Who Fly & Those Who Want to Fly Smarter. Web. 04 April 2012. http://boardingarea.com/. Macsata, Brandon. 30 November 2010. The TSA is violating the Fourth Amendment Rights. Web. 04 April 2012. http://dailycaller.com/. Mataconis, Doug. 15 July 2011. Federal Appeals Court Rejects 4th Amendment Challenge To TSA “Nude” Image Scanners. Web. 04 April 2012. http://outsidethebeltway.com/. Taylor, Alycia B.; Steedman, Sara. December 2003. The Evolution of Airline Security since 9/11. Web. 04 April 2012. http://ifpo.org/articlebank/. Read More