A Dereliction of Duty in Texas

by Michael Maharrey

Why government?

John Locke arguably influenced constitutional framers and ratifiers to a greater degree than any other political philosopher. He advanced the idea of individual sovereignty,  that each of us possesses a natural, God-given right to self-determination. He argued that people join to together in society and grant certain powers to government for a limited and express purpose.

“It is not without reason that he seeks out, and is willing to join in society with others, who are already united or have a mind to unite, for the mutual preservation of their lives, liberties and estates, which I call by the general name property. The great and chief end, therefore, of men’s uniting into commonwealths and putting themselves under government is the preservation of their property.”

Judging the Texas legislature’s performance by Lock’s criteria, I have to rate its performance an epic fail.

After weeks of the obfuscating, blame gaming and political posturing, Texas lawmakers failed to pass an anti-groping bill that would have protected their citizens from unwarranted federal touching, poking and prodding. They failed in their most basic function. Failed to protect a vital component of the people’s property. Failed to defend the liberty of Texans.

Tenth Amendment Center founder and executive director Michael Boldin summed up.

“It’s a state’s duty to stop the TSA, because the TSA is never going to stop itself.”

The people grant certain, specific and enumerated powers to the federal government. The rest they reserve to their state governments and to themselves. When the federal government lays hold of powers not rightly belonging to it, the state government should step in on behalf of its people.

James Madison articulated this idea in the Virginia Resolutions of 1798.

In case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.

Duty bound.

I could go into a lengthy analysis of the Fourth Amendment and explain how the federal government oversteps its authority every time it grabs an airline passenger’s crotch without probable cause. I could go into background and history. I could quote founders and political philosophers.

But really, do I need to?

Doesn’t the sight of former Miss USA Susie Castillo crying because she felt utterly violated at a TSA checkpoint tell the story? Doesn’t the thought of a mentally challenged young man boarding a plane without a treasured possession because some TSA goon thought a plastic hammer “could be used as a weapon” tell the story? Doesn’t the image of a 95-year-old dying grandmother, wanting only to board a plane so she could spend her last days on earth with her family, stripping off her Depends after a 45 minute pat-down ordeal tell the story? Or how about a 6-year-old child, crying, questioning her mother, “Did I do something wrong?” after a badged agent decided rubbing her hands over the child was vital to national security?

No. We don’t need legal analysis or a history lesson to understand.

TSA procedures represent a grievous violation. Not just a violation of our rights, but a violation of our dignity.

And they did nothing.

Those Texas legislators responsible for allowing this bill to die stand guilty of dereliction of duty.

Enjoyed This Post?

We cannot succeed without your help, as we will never accept government grants or handouts. Please help us by investing in the Constitution and freedom today!

Enjoyed This Post?
19 comments
Richard Walbaum
Richard Walbaum

You can download The Natural Law Remedy to TSA Airline Security Groping, a free chapter from my upcoming book which explains the laws of airline screening, and provides a legal theory to resist groping of private parts. It doesn't mean you can fly without being groped, but it will give you a legal basis to sue the government for violating your right to travel. Get it at www.NaturalLawRemedy.com. Please use the blog there to record your results with this theory.

@Spazduck
@Spazduck

The bill would have been purely symbolic. Even the state governments don't challenge the federal government's authority to create the TSA or to regulate air travel or security. The law would have been invalid as soon as it was signed because it violates preemption doctrine. I suppose there's some value to having individual legislator's take a public stand on the issue or for states to express disapproval of TSA practices, but "dereliction of duty" is harsh rhetoric for failing to pass symbolic legislation.

And TSA practices do not violate the 4th Amendment. I'm certainly no fan of their methods, but unrestricted air travel is not a protected right. They don't need probable cause because you voluntarily submit yourself to TSA security measures. Like it or not -- and I don't like it -- what they're doing is constitutional.

MichaelBoldin
MichaelBoldin

where does the 4th amendment say ANYTHING about unrestricted air travel?

This is a common error - and a very bad one - in constitutional understanding.

The 4th amendment does a very simple thing - it restricts actions taken by the federal government. Probably cause, warrants, and the like - are required in ALL situations by the feds. nothing more, nothing less. period.

@Spazduck
@Spazduck

This is false as a matter of constitutional law. I didn't say that the TSA isn't subject to the 4th Amendment, only that the bar is considerably lower. The TSA is an administrativve agency and in exercising its power to conduct searches, it is subject only to reasonableness considerations, not probable cause. The same goes for the federal marshalls that scan your bag when you enter a federal courthouse. In these situtations the federal government can legitimately claim authority for more extensive security measures. Walking down the street or driving are not analogous, and the courts have said so.

Remind me where probable cause and warrants are mentioned in the Constitution.

Any response to the preemption issue?

@Spazduck
@Spazduck

I'm sorry. Of course, probable cause and warrants are mentioned in the Constitution. Realized my error right after I posted that.

Jeremy OConnell
Jeremy OConnell

The 4th Amendment ALWAYS applies when the government is involved. Air travel isn't a right that is true but as a citizen the 4th Amendment protects you against unauthorized searches. If you use your argument then the government can apply that to walking down the street. That isn't a "right". Driving isn't a "right" but still the Supreme states officers must have a reason to search your car. Plus simply pulling you over for speeding does NOT grant them the right to search your car. The 4th Amendment applies and does too with air travel. The TSA is stating you are a criminal when you have committed no crime.

mickey
mickey

I read on another site that international law recognizes each state is of itself, therefore, each state can make its own laws to withstand the Federal intrusion. I don't know the source for this but if this is correct, then the Fed has little power.

@Spazduck
@Spazduck

International law doesn't recognize sub-federal states as being anything other than subordinate entities.

mickey
mickey

Since we looked to Texas to make TSA go away, I am disappointed. I thought Perry had more in him. Alas, I read more about him and no way would I vote for him as POTUS.

It might behoove several governors to decide to join together in getting rid of TSA. Think about the reproduction systems subjected to radiation, the feel up of kids. How does one explain to a child they will never reproduce or produce deformed children because of this radiation? How does one explain to a child that a stranger can molest them while the parent looks on.

TSA is a result of the government unable to do its job, not a security issue for us. Unless, of course, obama is allowing terrorists into the country, wanting to make them citizens as home grown suicide bombers. Pretty logical answer.

shill
shill

Many, if not most, Texas legislators are like most politicians elsewhere; full of hot air, but when it comes down to the actual doing, short on guts.

Jeremy OConnell
Jeremy OConnell

I am not surprised. In the end politicians at ALL levels only care about power and growing Government. Government feeds itself. Texas is better than many states but still you are counting on politicians that really only care about getting reelected than passing sane laws. At the end of the day there is little difference in politicians at the local, state and federal levels. This country is on the brink because of political elite which has managed to dumb down our society. So the masses not being so outraged isn't surprising. Our country has been trained to blindly follow government. To look to government for ALL answers and to ignore the Constitution. After all it is a "living breathing" document we are told in school and in the news. Of course it is NOT a living document but that is what the masses are thought and what they believe. Polls still show Americans believe the TSA is protecting us. We are willing to trade security for freedom and thus we have neither. So little outrage and little done by politicians is NOT surprising. We are NOT the same freedom loving people at the time of the Revolution. We want government to protect us and thus the TSA lives.

@jeff__woods
@jeff__woods

I flew exactly one (business-related) trip after 9/11. It was in December 2001. I haven't been convicted of any felony and refuse to submit to such intrusions and searches as the government imposed on me to board those planes. Since then I refuse to submit to such intolerable invasions. Why are so many people still tolerating it? Does no one have a sense of decency, honor or privacy anymore? Vote with your wallet and your feet. Use alternate forms of transport. Personally, I've made it clear to my employers sense then that business travel will simply require time to drive. How long do you think the commercial airlines would tolerate the TSA if 90% of their customers just stopped flying until the TSA goes away?

Richard
Richard

I suspect that government's intention is to destroy the airline industry; then only the elite will be able to fly. It is the TSA's intention to roll out the body scanners to trains, buses, and shopping malls, so alternate forms of transportation will have the same groping problem.

Dot Pate
Dot Pate

I wont fly until the TSA says goodbye! And I can fly free.

Gordon
Gordon

Without a Constitution that defines and limits the scope and power of our central government, we are just another European despotism.

Pat
Pat

But that's the point. We DO have a constitution that the creation of the TSA violates. So why would any state not nullify it?