Progressif
Activisme de médias
Chargement…
| Registre | Mot de passe perdu ? | Bulletin
Un mot de passe sera expédié à toi. Ouverture | Mot de passe perdu ?
Un email te sera envoyé. Ouverture | Registre
Traduisez :
Translate to EnglishÜbersetzen Sie zum Deutsch/GermanПереведите к русскому/RussianΜεταφράστε στα ελληνικά/GreekVertaal aan het Nederlands/Dutchترجمة الى العربية/Arabic中文翻译/Chinese Traditional中文翻译/Chinese Simplified한국어에게 번역하십시오/Korean日本語に翻訳しなさい /JapaneseTraduza ao Português/PortugueseTraduca ad Italiano/ItalianTraduisez au Français/FrenchTraduzca al Español/Spanish

Outils : Nouvelles | Commentaire de poteau | Version d'imprimeur | Email à l'ami

Dimanche 12 août 2007

La cour indique que les voyageurs ne peuvent pas éviter des recherches d'aéroport

Partagez cet article :

Ces icônes lient aux emplacements bookmarking sociaux où les lecteurs peuvent partager et découvrir de nouvelles pages Web.
  • Digg
  • Slashdot
  • Technorati
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • feedmelinks
  • Furl
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • YahooMyWeb
  • De.lirio.us
  • blogmarks
  • Spurl
  • Tache
  • Fark

La cour de circuit des appels a retourné le précédent de 34 ans du circuit qui temps fini évoluait vers limiter quand les passagers pourraient refuser une recherche et partir de l'aéroport après qu'ils aient vérifié leurs sacs ou articles placés sur la machine de rayon X de criblage de sécurité. Citing threats of terrorism, the court ruled passengers give up all rights to be free of warrantless searches once a “passenger places hand luggage on a conveyor belt for inspection” or “passes though a magnetometer.”

“…Requiring that a potential passenger be allowed to revoke consent to an ongoing airport security search makes little sense in a post-9/11 world,” Judge Carlos Bea wrote for the unanimous 15-judge panel. “Such a rule would afford terrorists multiple opportunities to attempt to penetrate airport security by ‘electing not to fly’ on the cusp of detection until a vulnerable portal is found.”

The U.S. Supreme Court has never squarely addressed the limits of the Fourth Amendment in the context of airport searches. The attorney representing a man imprisoned for drug possession who tried to leave the airport rather than be searched is weighing whether to petition the justices to review the decision.

The case concerns Daniel Aukai, a Hawaiian man arrested with 50 grams of methamphetamine at the Honolulu International Airport in 2003. After he passed the initial screening station to board a flight to Kona, Hawaii, he was placed in a secondary search, as required by government protocol, because he did not have identification. He refused the search and asked to leave. Transportation Security Officials searched him and discovered the drugs and a glass pipe. 

He was handed 70 months. (See Ryan’s story from last year.) The sentence was upheld by the San Francisco appeals court.

“This is a post-9/11-bunker mentality,” said Aukai’s attorney, Pamela O’Leary Tower of Honolulu. “He said ‘I want  to leave.’  The purpose of an airport search is to keep people off planes with bombs. The opinion seems to gut that.”

In 1973, the  circuit court ruled that airport searches were valid “only if they recognize the right of a person to avoid search by electing not to board the aircraft.” In later rulings, the court  began backing off, ruling passengers could not opt out of searches if they had checked luggage or if carry-on items were flagged during the initial screening to enter the terminal area.

The case is United States v. Aukai, 04-10226.

 Section has more related reports

Help keep RINF going..

Comment on 'Court Says Travelers Can’t Avoid Airport Searches' :

RSS TrackBack URL

Related News:

  • Israel’s airport security questioned
  • Appeals Court Rules for E-Mail Privacy
  • Airport-style metal detectors to be used in English schools
  • BA jet crash lands at Heathrow
  • US officials can be sued in Sept 11 abuse case

  • This entry was posted on Sunday, August 12th, 2007 at 9:41 am and is filed under Breaking News . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

    Fair use notice

    This website contains some copyrighted material that has not been specifically authorised by the copy right owner. RINF is making such material available in our efforts to advance public understanding of poverty alleviation, political economy, popular democracy and social justice issues both in Scotland and overseas. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material provided under US Copyright Law.

    © RINF.COM Underground Gateway. All rights reserved.
    Send Alternative News And Breaking News To: Editor @ rinf.com
    There Are 734 Users Online Right Now

    Breaking News