Skip to comments.
Airport Screeners Protest New Rules **ACLU Alert**
AP ^
| 1-17-02
| GARY GENTILE
Posted on 01/17/2002 9:59:21 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Edited on 04/13/2004 3:29:10 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- The new federal law requiring airport screeners to be U.S. citizens is unconstitutional and discriminatory, a lawsuit filed Thursday charges.
Nine screeners who could lose their jobs sued Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta and John Magaw, the undersecretary of transportation for security, in federal court.
(Excerpt) Read more at bayarea.com ...
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
To: Oldeconomybuyer
The new federal law requiring airport screeners to be U.S. citizens is unconstitutional and discriminatory, a lawsuit filed Thursday charges. Gee, I thought the entire notion of CITIZENSHIP was a discrimination - a legal, legitimate discrimination as determined by the Constitution and the laws of this country. And beyond that, it just makes sense. We do get some citizen terrorists in this country, but they tend to act not through hijacking airlines but by hijacking schools, colleges and the Senate...
2
posted on
01/17/2002 10:04:20 AM PST
by
dirtboy
To: Oldeconomybuyer
San Francisco airport, where about 80 percent of its 800 screeners are not citizens80 freaking percent?!?! Jeez! Meanwhile, American citizens as myself are being "downsized" every single day.
I haven't an ounce of sympathy. I hope this lawsuit falls flat on it's face.
3
posted on
01/17/2002 10:17:23 AM PST
by
Drew68
To: Oldeconomybuyer
The new federal law requiring airport screeners to be U.S. citizens is unconstitutional and discriminatory, a lawsuit filed Thursday charges.I'd heard someone say that federalizing the screeners is also unconstitutional, because it would
allow government to search people's baggage without a warrant in violation of the Fourth
Amendment.
To: Oldeconomybuyer
. . .do not have a problem with the 'rules' but wish GW would declare this 'Federalization' a mistake; by Executive Order. . .scrap it and start over. . .
5
posted on
01/17/2002 10:20:31 AM PST
by
cricket
To: Oldeconomybuyer
This has to be the DUMBEST thing the ACLU has ever supported.
6
posted on
01/17/2002 11:34:44 AM PST
by
finnman69
To: Oldeconomybuyer
This citizenship requirement was about the only good thing in federalizing the airport screeners!
7
posted on
01/17/2002 1:10:44 PM PST
by
NYCVirago
To: NYCVirago
bump
8
posted on
01/17/2002 5:53:39 PM PST
by
expose
To: Oldeconomybuyer
How do all the illeagles figure they have rights anyways the constution is for american citizens
To: classygreeneyedblonde
The kitty, now that I like. Puurrrrr.
To: Oldeconomybuyer; grlfrnd; geezerette; gopcapitalist; houmatt
Other than
ADF, does anyone know about any other groups trying to shut down the ACLU?
To: Oldeconomybuyer
First off, can anyone by chance tell me where in the Constitution it says non-citizens have a right to be airport screeners?
Second, am I the only one who sees this for what it really is? This is the ACLU, once again, this time trying to undermine the safety and security of this country by attempting to make it so just about anyone can be an airport screener. And if one of them just happens to be a Muslim from Bin Laden country? Oh, no, we cannot discriminate against him. Even when he allows people to get on a plane who are probably armed with box cutters, handguns and perhaps more.
THIS IS WHY THE LAW WAS CREATED IN THE FIRST PLACE! THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION DOES NOT APPLY TO PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY!
THIS IS WHY THE ACLU MUST BE STOPPED!
12
posted on
01/18/2002 6:41:00 AM PST
by
Houmatt
To: classygreeneyedblonde
How do all the illeagles figure they have rights anyways the constution is for american citizensGood question.
13
posted on
01/18/2002 6:49:31 AM PST
by
kassie
To: Oldeconomybuyer
Is Alan Derwoshitz representing them?
To: expose
IIRC, the citizenship requirement for this doesn't even mean that the screener has to be a citizen, but be a permanent resident. If that is the case, than the ACLU's complaints seem even more ludicrous than usual!
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson