What Powers Should Airport Screeners Have?

The Wall Street Journal has published a story which asks whether the US agency that conducts security screenings at US airports, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), hasn’t begun overstepping its authority. The story discusses two recent US federal cases which have challenged the legality of searches and seizures conducted by the TSA. One case, before the district court for the Southern District of Ohio, concerned the seizure of three fake passports. That case has already been resolved with the finding that the seizure did not comport with the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution. The second case is evidently still pending before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

In the Ohio case, Judge Algenon L. Marbley found that Congress has only authorized the TSA to search for weapons and explosives; therefore, when the TSA searches for other things, it goes beyond its mandate. Yet, according to the Journal’s story, TSA is “now training airport screeners to spot anything suspicious, and then honoring them when searches lead to arrests for crimes like drug possession and credit-card fraud.” This charge is reminiscent of reports that Federal Air Marshalls were expected to meet quotas in terms of the number of “Surveillance Detection Reports” they filed which were also tied to salary raises, awards, and bonuses (Note: The Air Marshalls are also under the authority of the TSA).

The story and court cases raise a number of significant questions in terms of air transportation policy: Should the individuals who conduct airport screenings have general police powers? Would it enhance the ability to ensure flight safety and counter terrorism? Is it necessary for these ends? The scope and limits on the powers of screeners is likely to vary from nation to nation. Does that fact present a problem for effective counter-terrorist efforts?

Incidentally, Chris Soghoion has dedicated a number of blog entries to the TSA and his experiences with them, including one incident that involved the interplay of TSA and local police authority. Chris has long pointed out that the maintenance of a no-fly list is of limited effectiveness so long as individuals are permitted to board domestic US flights without some form of identification (Note TSA spokesman Greg Soule’s discussion of identity in the Wall Street Journal article).