Lawsuit Judge considers dismissing airport stripping suit

Greenwich Time.com: Judge considers dismissing airport stripping suit

This sounds like a routine pre-trial motion by a defendant hoping to get out of a trial & judgment. A two-day jury trial has been scheduled starting Jan. 18.

 

Judge considers dismissing airport stripping suit

 

More from a local Richmond paper ...

Richmond Times-Dispatch: RIC airport protester, federal officials present arguments in lawsuit

The crux of the government's case is that he "disobeyed a command to pass through a security scanner"? But that's not required and cannot be required. That's called "opting out".

The government attorney seems to conveniently forget that the criminal charges against him were dropped, presumably because the message on his chest was a form of free speech.

 

More details in the UK Daily Mail: TSA lawyers dismiss law suit filed by protester arrested after scrawling Fourth Amendment on his chest

(The title is misleading. Lawyers only move to dismiss.)

 

Separated by a common language? I just hope stories like this that appear in overseas news outlets convince people to spend their leisure money in places other than the States for now.

 

OK. So what I get out of this is that unless you look like this person,



then you're gonna get hassled by the airport police.

 

Good opinion piece by Bob Barr in the AJC ...

Atlanta Journal Constitution: The Barr Code: Educating TSA can land you in jail

 

I had noticed this before, but this lawsuit apparently is naming the specific TSO as a plaintiff ....

LA Times: Aaron Tobey TSA Fourth Amendment Dispute Heads to Court … and to Abs

Do the feds indemnify individual employees when their behavior violates accepted standards and our civil liberties?

 

The headline is misleading -- the most important defendants remain in the suit, and it is going to trial.

Washington Examiner: Most of Va. airport stripping suit dismissed

WINA: Most Of Airport Stripping Suit Dismissed

No surprises, really. I'd expect Reichsminister Napolitano und Reichskommissar Pistole to be dropped from the suit. They would never be held personally liable anyway.

The judge probably felt the airport police officers conducted an appropriate investigation in response to being called by TSA. That lets the airport commission off the hook. We don't have the info that the judge had in making that decision, but if anyone can dredge up the briefs, I'll post them.

That leaves the two screeners, which is good!!!

 

The male screeners were too busy rolling their tongues back into their mouths to call over a LEO.

 

Trial on First and Fourth Amendment issues January 18, 2012. Comments?

The lawsuit against the TSA screeners and airport police officers is still on.

 

According to the Washington Post article you cited, "False imprisonment and malicious prosecution claims against three Richmond International Airport police officers were not included in the motions for dismissal."

So that leave 1) the screeners being sued for 1st amendment issues and the 2) the police officers being sued for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution.

 

Interesting that Nappy & Pissy along with the airport and cops are off the hook while the TSOs remain exposed. Presumably TSA will defend them but even if they aren't convicted they might still be open to civil action, like OJ Simpson. This could be a great development.

 

This just in...Judge Dismisses most of lawsuit filed by VA man...

The good news:

The bad news:

 

Actually there wasn't much "bad" news -- the dismissals were to be expected. It will still go to trial with two clerks & three cops in the docket. This is another great opportunity for TSA to feel as one with their presumed brethren in the law-enforcement community.

 

http://consumerist.com/2011/09/judg...rom-man-who-wrote-4th-amendment-on-chest.html

It is what it is. I'm no lawyer, but it sounds like the lawsuit has been narrowed until the only ones left on the hook are the TSA clerks.

 

It's a rehash of the last story, the Consumerist is just a bit late to the party. See the response immediately preceding yours. There are still 5 people in the docket.

 

Thanks. I admit that I found the article more than a bit confusing.

 

They rather misused the word "dismissed". The Consumerist is not exactly known for careful precise reporting.

Some counts were dismissed, and some defendants with no counts left against them were dismissed, but there are still 5 defendants, including 3 (police officers) with potentially deep pockets.