[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Federal Court Rules TSA Can Abusively Fondle Your Genitals With Immunity
Source: Free Thought Project
URL Source: https://thefreethoughtproject.com/tsa-appeals-court-ruling-immunity/
Published: Jul 12, 2018
Author: Matt Agorist
Post Date: 2018-07-12 12:50:41 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 2789
Comments: 23

The TSA – whose job is supposedly “fighting terrorism” – is, without doubt, one of America’s most corrupt and incompetent agencies. However, last year, they apparently became so unsatisfied with the mere ability to strip search babies, remove colostomy bags, beat up blind cancer patients, and fondle your genitalia, that they announced a more invasive physical pat-downs. The pat-downs, which TSA warned would probably prompt assault complaints with the police department because of their invasive nature, have been implemented and now, a federal court ruled that these complaints mean absolutely nothing because the TSA cannot be sued.

As the Washington Post reports, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, which sits in Philadelphia, held that TSA officers enjoy sovereign immunity because, despite their badges and titles as “officers,” they do not qualify as “investigative or law enforcement officers” who could be held legally responsible for abuses under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

The court looked at the question of when a TSA search should prompt protection under the Fourth Amendment. The court ominously noted that TSA screeners are more like federal meat inspectors than cops. Indeed, anyone whose ever found themselves subject to the invasive nature of a TSA pat down knows just how much this agency likes to inspect “meat.”

What this ruling highlights is the dehumanizing nature of the federal government who likens human beings who wish to travel by airplane as “meat” to be “inspected.”

“[W]e are sympathetic to the concerns this may raise as a matter of policy, particularly given the nature and frequency of TSOs’ contact with the flying public,” the court stated.

In a moment of rational thought, however, a single judge, Judge Thomas L. Ambro, dissented and aptly noted that the TSA are no different than cops conducting traffic stops and therefore should be held to the same degree of liability — which, as TFTP has reported at length, is not much. But, at least, they are not immune.

As WaPo reported, Ambro also noted that the majority’s opinion would bar passengers from bringing legal claims even in the most extreme cases, such as when TSA officers at Denver International Airport were accused of manipulating security procedures so that they could grope “attractive” male passengers.

“Their opinion leaves several plaintiffs without a remedy, even if a TSO assaults them, wrongfully detains them, or fabricates criminal charges against them,” Ambro wrote. “I do not believe this is what Congress intended.”

The court’s decision stemmed from the case of Nadine Pellegrino, a business consultant from Florida who experienced the invasive and demeaning nature of the TSA first hand.

As NBC reports:

According to court papers, Pellegrino had been randomly selected for additional screening at the Philadelphia airport before boarding a US Airways flight to Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Pellegrino, then 57, objected to the invasiveness of the search, but conditions deteriorated and she was later jailed for about 18 hours, the papers show. Criminal charges were filed, and Pellegrino was acquitted at a March 2008 trial.

Because the federal government grants itself sovereign immunity under the Tort Claims Act, the TSA, like all federal government employees are shielded from civil and criminal liability except in very limited circumstances.

The TSA, who has never stopped a terror attack and is unable to stop 95 percent of the tests against its tactics, gropes and molests children and adults alike — who unquestioningly accept it. Now, the very small percentage of people who actually stand up to them will have no recourse.

We now know a potential reason why the TSA is putting together a watchlist of those who criticize them. Once they snub out the last few people who value freedom, Americans more concerned with an ineffective facade of safety instead of individual liberty will be lining up to have their genitals fondled and groped so they can feel secure.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.

#3. To: Deckard (#0)

As the Court stated, suspicionless checkpoint searches are permissible under the Fourth Amendment when a court finds a favorable balance between the gravity of the public concerns served by the seizure, the degree to which the seizure advances the public interest, and the severity of the of the interference with individual liberty. The court concluded that TSA screenings fall into this category and constitute permissible administrative searches.

Pellegrino v. TSA, 15-3047 (3rd Cir, 11 Jul 2018)

9 “Administrative searches” are an exception to the general rule that a search or seizure is unreasonable in the absence of individualized suspicion. See United States v. Hartwell, 436 F.3d 174, 178 (3d Cir. 2006). “Suspicionless checkpoint searches” are one such example, and “are permissible under the Fourth Amendment when a court finds a favorable balance between ‘the gravity of the public concerns served by the seizure, the degree to which the seizure advances the public interest, and the severity of the interference with individual liberty.’” Id. at 178–79 (quoting Illinois v. Lidster, 540 U.S. 419, 427 (2004)). In Hartwell, we concluded that TSA screenings fall into this category and constitute permissible administrative searches. See id. at 181.

Pellegrino at 37:

Based on these various indicia of meaning — the law enforcement proviso’s text, structure, context, purpose, and history, as well as relevant case law — we are persuaded that the phrase “investigative or law enforcement officers” refers only to criminal law enforcement officers, not to federal employees who conduct only administrative searches.

Pellegrino at 47-48:

In sum, as the delineated duties of TSOs make clear, and as is the case with many federal agencies, there is a clear division between the criminal law enforcement and noncriminal law enforcement arms of the TSA. TSOs—like meat inspectors, OSHA workers, and other personnel who are permitted to perform only administrative searches—fall into the latter category and thus do not qualify as “investigative or law enforcement officers” under the law enforcement proviso of the FTCA. Because the proviso does not apply, Pellegrino’s intentional tort claims are barred by § 2680(h)’s intentional tort exception, and the District Court correctly dismissed those claims based on the United States’ sovereign immunity.

- - - - - - - - - -

Because the federal government grants itself sovereign immunity under the Tort Claims Act....

Moron has it backwards.

The Federal Government has sovereign immunity except where it waives it. The FTCA provides a limited WAIVER of sovereign immunity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Tort_Claims_Act

The Federal Tort Claims Act (August 2, 1946, ch.646, Title IV, 60 Stat. 812, "28 U.S.C. Pt.VI Ch.171" and 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b)) ("FTCA") is a 1946 federal statute that permits private parties to sue the United States in a federal court for most torts committed by persons acting on behalf of the United States. Historically, citizens have not been able to sue their state—a doctrine referred to as sovereign immunity. The FTCA constitutes a limited waiver of sovereign immunity, permitting citizens to pursue some tort claims against the government.

[...]

The Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946, for the first time, gave American citizens the right to sue the federal government."

nolu chan  posted on  2018-07-12   15:08:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: nolu chan (#3)

I made my post before I read down this far. Am I going to find in your post here, the case Matt Agorist refers to in his article?

Gatlin  posted on  2018-07-12   16:08:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 6.

        There are no replies to Comment # 6.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 6.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com