Lawsuit No-fly list suit thrown out [Remanded to district court for trial!]

Discussion in 'Aviation Passenger Security in the USA' started by Mike, May 4, 2012.

  1. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    It's not just the suits over nude-o-scopes & other checkpoint abuse -- now a suit over inclusion in the no-fly list has been thrown out on the grounds that TSA is an essential party to such a suit & TSA can't be sued at the district court level.

    Huffington Post: Oregon judge dismisses suit by men on no-fly list

    We need to have a Bastille Day & level this disrepetutable, unaccountable agency. Here's a nice photo of the final day of East Germany's Department of Homeland Security (a 100% literal translation of Ministerium für Staatssicherheit) aka the hated Stasi:

    [​IMG]

    Notice looks of joy on their faces as they take over the Stasi HQ!
     
    Frank, barbell and Lisa Simeone like this.
  2. Lisa Simeone

    Lisa Simeone Original Member

    "We send you to war, get your limbs blown off, and refuse to let you back into the country." -US Government
     
  3. Sunny Goth

    Sunny Goth Original Member Coach

  4. Lisa Simeone

    Lisa Simeone Original Member

    Looks like it got thrown out of District Court and is going to be heard by an appeals court. I don't understand these things, but you as a lawyer surely do! :)
     
  5. Lisa Simeone

    Lisa Simeone Original Member

     
  6. Lisa Simeone

    Lisa Simeone Original Member

    Best comment so far at that Wired article:
     
    Sunny Goth likes this.
  7. Sunny Goth

    Sunny Goth Original Member Coach

    I only glanced at the Huffington Post article -- looks like bad reporting, or at least bad titling. A better title would have been something along the lines of what Wired used.

    Anyway, that's why I was confused - two articles in two days, one saying the plaintiffs get their day in court, the other saying the opposite.
     
  8. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    I suspect that what the 9th Circuit is going to hear is an appeal on the question of jurisdiction and not the complaint itself, which would mean that they are not yet getting their day in court.
     
  9. Sunny Goth

    Sunny Goth Original Member Coach

    That could very well be.
     
  10. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Oregonian: Lawyers to urge appellate judges to reinstate no-fly lawsuit in federal court in Portland

     
  11. Mike

    Mike Founding Member Coach

    Yay! Good news ...

    Associated Press: Appeals Court Allows No-Fly Challenge to Proceed

    A federal appeals court panel ruled Thursday that a lawsuit over the government's no-fly list can go forward in a lower court in Oregon. In a unanimous ruling, the three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that a lower court improperly threw out the lawsuit. U.S. District Court Judge Anna Brown rejected the case last year, saying her court didn't have authority over the policies and procedures of the Transportation Security Administration.

    Oregonian: No-fly list lawsuit should proceed in federal court in Portland, appeals panel rules

    A federal appeals panel has unanimously ruled that a lawsuit challenging the FBI over the secretive no-fly list should be reinstated in federal district court in Portland.

    In a decision issued Thursday, the panel found that U.S. District Judge Anna Brown erred in dismissing the case, filed on behalf of 15 U.S. citizens or permanent residents, for lack of jurisdiction last year. The appeals decision said Brown’s court does have the authority to consider the their complaint about placement on the list as well as to consider whether the government’s process for getting off the list is constitutionally inadequate.

    It will be the first time that the federal government has to defend the validity of the process people must use to challenge their inclusion on the no-fly list, said Nusrat Choudhury, the staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who argued the appeal before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
     
    Elizabeth Conley likes this.
  12. Elizabeth Conley

    Elizabeth Conley Original Member

    Thank God.

    Few things have horrified me more than the loss of due process in Post Patriot Act America.
     
    DeafBlonde and nachtnebel like this.
  13. Fisher1949

    Fisher1949 Original Member Coach

    Finally, a victory for the Constitution.
     
  14. TSA News Blog

    TSA News Blog News Feed

    Cea.jpg
    Finally. That’s all I can say. Finally, a federal court ruled that it does, indeed, have jurisdiction over at least some TSA procedures.​
    It’s about time.
    The TSA has argued time and time again that its procedures are not subject to the U.S. Federal District Court system. And until now, federal district courts have agreed. They agreed in Ventura v. TSA, the case brought by the Rutherford Institute on behalf of several plaintiffs, and pretty much every other case filed before this year.
    As reported by the Wall Street Journal, an Appellate Court recently ruled that the Ninth District Court erred when it dismissed a 2010 case brought by the ACLU on behalf of 15 people who were barred from returning to the U.S. because they’re on the no-fly list. The suit asks that the defendants be removed from the list or be told why they’re on it in the first place. The Appellate Court ruled that the federal court system does have jurisdiction and can make rulings on the TSA’s policies and procedures.
    What’s amazing about this ruling is that it even had to happen. A government agency not subject to court oversight? Really? When was it, exactly, that we fell down this rabbit hole? And why has it taken so long to realize we’ve gone through the looking glass?
    (Photo: Flickr Creative Commons/Cea)
     
  15. Doober

    Doober Original Member

    I don't understand the quoted part I've highlighted from Elizabeth Connelly's post above:


    Can someone explain it to me?
     
  16. RB

    RB Founding Member

    I think reading the actual decision might be helpful.

    http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/07/26/11-35407.pdf

    Here is my take on the whole thing, but keep in mind I am no lawyer.

    The Do Not Fly lists are held by the TSC under control of the FBI. Airlines feed passenger information to TSA and TSA has to review the NFL for name inclusion before the airlines can issue a ticket. If a person is denied a ticket TSA is once again involved since challenges to inclusion are filed with TSA but TSA only passes along the challenge to the TSC. TSA has no role in investigating why a person may be on the list or in the removal process. In this courts opinion since TSA is only a conduit of information this suit does not challenge TSA orders so the court to hear the challenge is not the Court of Appeals but the District Court where the case was originally filed.

    In few words, the NFL is not TSA's baby so the restrictions on courts are not in play.

    Of course I could have it all wrong.:oops:


    from the decision:

    -16.
     

Share This Page