Dear Editor,

I admire the great state of Texas for considering limits on the foundling
of your citizens at your airports. After watching Youtubes of TSA workers
feeling up young children with apparent glee, I have wonder what kind of
background checks they run on these people. In fact, I would like to know
the sexual preference of those groping my private parts. As I want the
experience to be as mentally and emotionally uncomfortable for them as it
is for me. With our prisons full of gropers, I imagine that some TSA
staff would work for free! In fact, based upon The Code of Hammurabi, a
Babylonian law code, we should be able to grope the gropers! After all,
an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth!
It is amazing that the same people who protested the groping of POW's in Cuba and Iraq don't say a damn thing when the TSA is groping us!!

Interesting that police powers of the states come from the tenth amendment, which nullifies federal police powers. The 4th amendment says the feds have no business in such affairs.

Their comment is typical of the arrogance of a government that has twisted the original Federal form of govt. into the typical Nationalism one. The paradigmare opposites,where the latter believes the Central govt has all power and delegates at their whim and mercy to the lower govts. anything extra is deems convenient.
However, the federal govt's powers and the states powers are separate, with the federal one solely designed to PROTECT not undermine or control the individuals states under its umbrella. That said, it is not an argument about a state legislating the fed. but precisely the other way around. The FED cannot legislate a state! (See Printz v. U.S.)

This article completely misses the point. In reference to the 4th amendment point--without the incorporation of the 4th Amendment through the 14th Amendment, there is no guarantee to ANY citizens of ANY state of the rights guaranteed under the 4th Amendment (see Map v. Ohio, 1961, Aguilar v. Texas, 1964); so yes, there is quite a bit of wiggle room. There is wiggle room in every amendment subject to judicial review and the "penumbras and emanations" of the meanings of such words as 'liberty' and so forth.

This type of black and white analysis may read well to the average citizen, but it also ignores the truth behind constitutional interpretation and judicial review. The argument behind deference to the legislature and judicial activism would be a more pertinent topic.

Hurrah for Texas and Arzona (the illegal alien thing). When are the rest of you going to get your stuff together?

Hurrah for Texas and Arzona. When are the rest of you going to get your stuff together?

The Supreme Court is not empowered to rewrite the Constitution. It's very difficult to amend the Constitution, and the framers clearly did not intend to give a handful of political appointees the power to do an end run around that process. Please read George Orwell's novella "Animal Farm" for another example of how clear, fair, commonsense rules are turned on their head by those in power.

Wow!

If you want to know where all the knuckleheaded, right wing, white people are...all you have to do is join this inane group!

Pathetic.

Finally, a voice of sense! It is our duty as Americans to take it all back from these big corporation fed, back alley dealing COMMUNISTS! Osama was their puppet, JUST LIKE OBAMA!!!

Sorry, pal. The TSA monstrosity was created and nurtured by the Rove/Cheney Administration. Obama just inherited the monster. But thanks for playing.

We live in trying times. Make that dangerous times. Our beloved country is certainly undergoing change. From the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave we are now the Land of the Governmental Restricted, and the Home of the Sheep. The concept of our freedom, the Constitution of the United States, is under constant assault by our elected officials and their minions, yet we continue with our mundane lives while evil does its work. This trend did not begin with the current Administration, but it has surely accelerated under Obama and the current Congress and Senate.

So hurray for some practical resistance as offered in Texas! However, this ain't gonna fix very much.

The 4th amendment only places limits on state power (aka 'government agents'). Assuming we get some serious action via nullification in many locales then what? Well... yes, the federal government might just get the TSA out of the business of screening and violating our rights while boarding airplanes (a change I would truly welcome). However, we'd just return to the system we had prior to 9/11... private screening with individuals agreeing to being searched in exchange for transit by private corporations.

Again, the 4th amendment is NOT applicable between individual parties. It only limits action of the government.

Please weigh in if I've missed something...

Thanks. Fred.

And yes... I too recognize that our government(s) have continuously diminished the freedoms outlined by the 4th amendment for the last many decades. Local, state and federal lawmakers (and enforcing agencies) have put 'ends justify means' thinking ahead of the wise and reasoned frameworks (codified in the constitution) of 'limited state power' and guarantees of 'individual liberty' and 'rule of law'.

I mean, did they also give their consent because their parents bought them a ticket?

It is disingenuous to rely on Madison's concept of interposition without noting that the Supreme Court has rejected it at least twice, in Cooper v. Aaron (1958) and in Bush v. Orleans Parish School Board (1960). Furthermore, Madison himself had more to say on the subject during the Nullification Crisis of the 1830's: "But it follows, from no view of the subject, that a nullification of a law of the U. S. can as is now contended, belong rightfully to a single State, as one of the parties to the Constitution; the State not ceasing to avow its adherence to the Constitution. A plainer contradiction in terms, or a more fatal inlet to anarchy, cannot be imagined." [7] Rather, the interposition contemplated by Madison would be "a concurring and cooperating interposition of the States, not that of a single State." Madison argued that interposition would involve some sort of joint action among the states, such as amending the Constitution.

For some reason I can't get my comments posted. They are deleted right away. I guess the 2nd amendment is out at this site.

Oh well.

Mods, any reasons why I was not allowed my voice? I did not do any thing bad. Put up the posts you deleted & every one can see that for themselves.

thanks.

SamFox

'There is no wiggle room here. No warrants shall issue. None. The 4th amendment doesn’t offer any exceptions. Period."

This is an over-reaching statement. Jurisprudential exceptions have been developed (exigency, consent, etc.) that allow for warrantless searches on less than probable cause.

I think "consent" is the exception that applies here. By choosing to fly, you consent to the TSA search. Don't want to be searched by TSA? Don't fly. There have been many challenges to airport searches under the Fourth Amendment over the years; none have succeeded. I think the Texas law will see a similar fate.

This blog is inaccurate and TSA is absolutely correct although their wording can lead to some confusion for this ignorant writer and readers of this blog. The prevailing federal court rulings (because that's all that matters) on the supremacy clause have repeatedly concurred with the TSA's statement. He's also dead wrong about the fourth amendment issues as well. The constitutional issues that have arisen over TSA security policies are fourth amendment in nature and have been addressed by the Supreme Court going back to 1973 and reaffirmed subsequently time and time again.

"Notice there’s not one single word in the actual text that says anything about states regulating the federal government as the TSA claims."

^^^There doesn't have to be, moron, nor did the founding fathers intend for there to be. That is why we have judicial review which is what we call primary authority on constitutional issues.

This is one of the best posts I've ever seen on the issue and it spells it out for idiotic blogs like the one linked to above:
http://boardingarea.com/blogs/flyingwithfish/2010...

The problem with people like this who call themselves strict constitutionalists is that there's not a lawyer among them and they don't know a thing about the Constitution and they certainly don't understand that what defines constitutionality is defined in Article 3, Section 2 and NOT in the amendments. The founding fathers knew that it would be impossible to address every issue of law and liberty in one document that could arise which is why they vested that power in the judiciary. Despite what people think, the Bill of Rights is a collection of general rights subject to interpretation by the judiciary. Read Article 3, Section 2 if you don't believe me.

"There is no wiggle room here. No warrants shall issue. None. The 4th amendment doesn’t offer any exceptions. Period."

Wrong.. Again, ZERO understanding of precedent and case law.

"So, in simple terms, what does the supremacy clause mean? Just what it says. The constitution is supreme. And any federal laws made in line with the constitution is supreme. Nothing more, nothing less."

Wrong again. ALL federal laws are PRESUMED Constitutional unless ruled otherwise by a Federal Court.

Seriously, take a constitutional law course or two before you spout off.

I'm not a fan of the TSA's policies because they're not effective but all of this is just a distraction from the real issue: Profiling. That's how you stop terrorist attacks. Ask the Israelis who haven't had a terrorist attack since1967.

At some point soon, I'm hoping the Tenth Amendment Center will take the lead in organizing the disparate patriotic organizations around to country to march on and sit-in in DC, failing which we Tenthers should take unilateral action. It can be both educational and appropriately assertive. Something to seriously ponder in the coming months.

Why does everyone think Ron Paul will save us? I remember in 2008 when most people thought
Obama was our savior but we all know how that turned out. No one man can save us but ourselves! the sooner people realize this the sooner we will stand on our own two feet so we can stand against
the tyrannical government we are being opressed by! Wake up cause We are our only hope and time
is short!

Hate to do this to you, but I think your claims are based on some false assumptions about both the searches and the supremacy clause.

First, the supremacy clause does say that laws made in line with the constitution will be supreme to those of states. Administrative searches are constitutional under the fourth amendment without probable clause when they serve a specific public need and are done according to standard operating procedures in a place where individuals have a lowered expectations of privacy. These types of searches include border checks, and my guess is that you are the type of person who would not want a magistrate to search, stop or question every person who crosses the border. Checks at airports save us from terrorist attacks like 9/11, so... pressing public need, everyone knows about them, and procedures which apply to everyone... so check, check, and check.

Therefore, if these searches are in line with the constitution, and the TSA is in line with its congressional mandate, its rules are superior to those of the state of TX, and TX retains no right to restrict its actions as a federal entity.

While you may disagree that this is not in the original spirit of the founding fathers, I doubt that they would have foreseen our need for border checks or terrorism prevention. You can attack this by calling it unconstitutional, but you'd have to figure out how to justify some checks without others. (and before you point out that some people are citizens and others aren't, please remember that the 4-6th amendments were specifically written for all individuals or criminal defendants, not just Americans.)

We have a RIGHT to FREEDOM, NOT "SAFETY". There is nothing in the constitution about keeping us "Safe" -- this is about keeping our country FREE, including the ability to travel freely.

For your information, terrorists don't care about killing PEOPLE, they care about killing the AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE and SHUTTING DOWN OUR FREE SOCIETY.

In that case, the terrorists have already won...and guess what? The "terrorists" are now our own government!!!!!!!

Here, take a bar of soap and head into the "showers" -- be a good little sheep and do exactly as the government tells you...

I read all the comments here and have some good news for you. Just google "under color of law" and read the statue very carefully. There is both criminal AND civil recourse if your Constitutionally guaranteed rights are violated. One might have a bit of trouble getting it noticed and enforced but there are laws that address that issue. I DEFINITELY agree that judges ARE running the country though. It's ALL about LAWYERS!!! THEY ARE the terrorists. Freedom will not exist so long as they are in power. by the way, the Constitution says judges will remain in power so lang as they are in "Good Behavior". If ginsburg is acting in good behavior it is news to me. They are NOT supposed to "rule", they are supposed to render a decision based on the Constitution. What they are(and we are as well) going by is "precedential" law, not Constitutional law. It is the biggest travesty ever in this country. Precedential law = TYRANNY!!! Get a set Americans and make a stand!!!! We have the baton of freedom and prosperity and we are NOT passing it on! SHAME ON US!!!

The courts are corporations and their only function is to make a profit. They enforce the Uniform Commerical Code, aka UCC. So what is the solution to this problem? When we realize what has been done to us, we need to study the statutes that pertain to every American, which includes you, get educated on the UCC. The UCC gives us a way out if we know how to use it under UCC 1-308.

When you play ball in their court, you will lose everytime. I have a lot of respect for Ron Paul but he is not the savior of our Constitutional Rights, YOU ARE. Educate yourself then put that knowledge into action and stop whining about the atrocities taking place all around you. Take the steps needed to free yourself from this tryanny called the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. When more Americans do this then we win! IF YOU ARE NOT PREPARED TO FIGHT FOR YOUR RIGHTS, YOU DON'T DESERVE TO HAVE THEM!

In almost every case, the average American, along with the 50 states are not protected by the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights. We have all given up our rights by entering into contracts that have nothing to do with protecting our Constitutional Rights. These contracts may be entered into knowingly or unknowingly but you are still under contract just by benefiting from their services.

The TSA does not have the Constitutional right to search you, however, you are under a contract that says they can through statutes, executive orders, etc.. Americans seem to believe the only way to fight this is to go to court every time your rights are violated. Good luck on that one! Maybe after spending thousands or tens of thousands of dollars and several years of litigation you might win but by then it's a moot point.

Thank you for this excellent article. I have crossposted to the real revo. Please feel free to review my posting here: http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=45826 and email me if you have any questions or concerns. Only partial content was posted, but full credit and links are given.

I purchase a ticket from an airline and therefor have a contract of a service traded for goods. If I refuse to be searched, I likely lose my flight. Will I be reimbursed? Doubtful. So the only objective reasoning to this order of operation is blackmail: if you do not subject yourself to a warrant-less search, then you will lose the contract already made with the airline.

Who cares about 4th amendment violations when the entire thing is based on a criminal act to begin with?

Supremacy Clause says:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."

The TSA does not operate in accord with either our Constitution for the United States and Bill of Rights and nor the Laws of the United States in pursuance thereof and so cannot appeal to the supremacy clause for its authority.

Therefore TSA can be nullified by the several sovereign States within their jurisdiction in order to protect its Citizens from TSA's unconstitutional and lawless activity.