JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.

Thursday, April 22, 2010

Civil rights groups seek suspension of airport full body scanners
Jonathan Cohen at 10:17 AM ET

[JURIST] A group of more than 30 privacy and civil liberty groups on Wednesday asked [petition, PDF; press release] the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) [official website] to suspend the full body scanner [TSA backgrounder] program being implemented by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) [official website]. The petition states that use of the full body scanner program is an invasion of privacy [JURIST news archive] and that:

deployment of Full Body Scanners in US airports, as currently proposed, violates the U.S. Constitution, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ("RFRA"), the Privacy Act of 1974 ("Privacy Act"), and the Administrative Procedures Act ("APA"). As described below, the FBS program effectively subjects all air travelers to unconstitutionally intrusive searches that are disproportionate and for which the TSA lacks any suspicion of wrongdoing.

According to the petitioners, the scanners are a step toward doing away with individualized suspicion and are particularly offensive to devout individuals. As such, the scans are opposed by religious groups [RNS report]. The petition also alleges that the scanners themselves have two major flaws: they cannot detect powdered explosives [Independent report], and the operating systems are vulnerable to attack [WP report].

In February, the UK's Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) [official website] announced that full body scanners in use at two UK airports may be illegal [JURIST report]. The body scanners were introduced in part as a response to the failed US bombing attempt by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab [Telegraph profile; JURIST news archive] on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day. The attempted attack prompted Obama to announce tighter security measures, which civil rights groups opposed [JURIST reports] as a pretext to racial profiling.

Link |  | print | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


 Judge rules Colorado ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional
9:35 AM ET, July 25

 UN rights council to form commission to investigate war crimes in Gaza
9:27 AM ET, July 25

 Seven arrested in $1.6 million StubHub fraud case
1:03 PM ET, July 24

 click for more...

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!


Unprecedented Notice of Warrantless Wiretapping in a Closed Case
Ramzi Kassem
CUNY School of Law


Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.


Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org