Mike: The Federal Authority is from The Aviation Security Act of 2001(ATSA)(P.L. 107-71)(i.e. 49 USC).
The September 11, 2001 hijacking of four airliners, and the enormous loss of life from the use of these airplanes as weapons, has focused congressional concerns on aviation security. During the debate in Congress the overarching issue was the degree of federal involvement needed both to make commercial air travel safer and to restore the public’s confidence in the security of our Nation’s airway and airports.
On October 11, 2001, the Senate passed, after multiple amendments, the Aviation Security Act of 2001, S. 1447 (introduced by Senator Hollings). The bill provided for the federalization of most aspects of airport security. The responsibility for much of the law enforcement aspect of airport security would have been shifted from the Department of Transportation (DOT) to the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Front-line screening of passengers and baggage would be carried out by federal agents under the authority of the Attorney General. DOT would have continued to administer the Federal Air Marshals (FAM) program but under DOJ guidelines.
On November 1, 2001, the House passed a bill that was significantly different from Senate-passed S. 1447. The Airport Security Federalization Act of 2001 (S. 1447 amended by the text of H.R. 3150, introduced by Representative Young), included provisions to shift the responsibility for the security of all modes of
transportation to a new administration, the Transportation Security Administration(TSA), within DOT. The bill called for the oversight of all airport screeners by uniformed federal agents but would have allowed for the use of contract employees as front-line security screeners.
On November 19, 2001, President Bush signed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) (P.L. 107-71; H. Rept. 107-296). ATSA, includes elements of both the House and Senate bills as well as new provisions added to facilitate the final compromise that was agreed to in conference. On the contentious issue of whether screeners should be federal agents or contractor personnel, ATSA provides that, within one year, federal employees shall be hired to take over airport security screening services at all but five U.S. commercial airports. Two years later, however, airports may opt-out of the federal screener system and switch to contractor screeners. The Act also establishes a new Transportation Security Administration (TSA) headed by an Under Secretary of Transportation for Security. Within three months of enactment, the responsibilities for aviation security would be transferred from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to the TSA. Also included in the Act are provisions: requiring that, within 60 days, airports provide for the screening or bag-matching of all checked baggage; allowing pilots to carry firearms; requiring the electronic transmission of passenger manifests on international flights prior to landing in the U.S.; requiring background checks, including national security checks, of persons who have access to secure areas at airports; and requiring that all federal security screeners be U.S. citizens...
You may be interested in the below (Virginia COULTER, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, Transportation Safety Administration, and Patricia Lamb, Defendants.):
“The TSA argues, and this Court agrees, that airport security screeners do not constitute investigative or law enforcement officials within the meaning of the FTCA. The TSA points to a decision by the District Court for the District of Oregon in Welch v. Huntleigh USA Corp., No. 04-663, 2005 WL 1864296 (D.Or. Aug.4, 2005). In that case, the court held that the United States could not be held liable for intentional torts committed by an airport security screener.”
http://www.expressjetpilots.com/the-pipe/showthread.php?39870-Suing-the-TSA&p=425123
“to make commercial air travel safer and to restore the public’s confidence in the security of our Nation’s airway and airports.”
I submit that the feds failed in both regards. Failed miserably, especially when it comes to restoring confidence. Their efforts have had the reverse affect.