You may remember a passenger and runner of marathons named Roger Vanderklok: the TSA “detained” him in 2013 because of “a heart-monitoring watch” in his luggage. While questioning Mr. K, the thugs’ supervisor waxed “confrontational,” whereupon his victim asked to file a complaint. In the finest tradition of a police-state, the supervisor “retaliated” by calling the cops on Mr. K—and, for good measure, lied about him, too, claiming Mr. K threatened to bomb his flight. That bought the professional, never-before-arrested Mr. K a night in the hoosegow. When the case went to court, the supervisor’s allegations didn’t match the surveillance tapes, so the judge dismissed the charges. Mr. K then sued the TSA, as well he should. And now we have the decision on his attempt to protect the rest of us from these corrupt bullies. As US News and World Report summarizes it, “U.S. Appeals Court Rules for TSA Screener Who Had Run-In With Flier.”
No surprise there. I can’t recall a single case in which Amerika’s pathetic excuse for a judiciary has ever favored “fliers,” justice, or even decency. But the judges’ excuse is more than the usual slap in the face to us serfs: “The Third Circuit said for the first time Tuesday that Transportation Security Administration airport screeners cannot be sued for allegedly retaliating against travelers who exercise free speech” because their “role in public safety is ‘so significant’ [oh, you betcha: 95% failure rate in finding contraband] that the judiciary should not create a remedy involving TSA agents who may violate the constitutional rights of passengers.”
There you have it, folks: a bald admission from Our Rulers that their damnable War on Terror trumps all our “constitutional rights,” even that of “free speech.”
I’ve seen atrocity upon atrocity while covering the TSA. But this time, I’m speechless.
