Feds threaten to ground Texas airplanes if anti-groping bill becomes law

(The federal govt is being ridiculous. What a surprise...--jef)

By Stephen C. Webster - RAW Story
Wednesday, May 25th, 2011

 

 

A bill that would criminalize TSA agents who conduct airport patdown searches was scuttled last night after the federal government threatened to ground all flights out of Texas.

The proposed law would have levied misdemeanor charges against security agents who "intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly [touch] the anus, sexual organ, buttocks, or breast of the other person, including touching through clothing, or touching the other person in a manner that would be offensive to a reasonable person."

An earlier version of House Bill 1937 would have made such action a felony.

"If [the legislation] passes, the federal government would likely seek an emergency stay of the statute," a letter from the Department of Justice explained (PDF). "Unless or until a such a stay were granted, TSA would likely be required to cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew."

As a result, the bill's co-sponsor in the Texas Senate withdrew the legislation. It had cleared the Texas House by unanimous vote.

"All that HB 1937 does is require that the TSA abide by the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution," State Rep. David Simpson, the bill's author, fired back in an advisory. "We aren‘t even prohibiting the pat-downs, per se. We're just saying you can't go straight to third base. You have to have a reason -- you have to have probable cause -- before groping someone‘s sexual organs."

Simpson was unavailable for comment at time of this story's publication. He'd previously told Raw Story that if states do not stand up to the TSA on airport security, similar security measures would start appearing at sporting events and even in the general public.

State Sen. Dan Patrick (R) ultimately gave in and withdrew the bill, but only after insisting that he would not "cave" to "heavy handed threats by the federal government."

Texas to make TSA pat-downs felony crimes

Thursday, May 05, 2011 by J. D. Heyes

(NaturalNews) - Well, it was bound to happen. Someone has finally gotten so tired of the X-rated pat-downs at airports they are trying to criminalize it.

Tired of waiting for the federal government to do the right thing and uphold Americans' Fourth Amendment right to privacy and protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, Texas lawmakers are moving to make invasive pat-downs by Transportation Security Administration screeners a felony.

A bill moving through the state Legislature would make it illegal to intentionally touch a person's private areas, even above clothing, unless the screener had probable cause the passenger was hiding something - and by that, it means something dangerous.

Rep. David Simpson, R-Austin, said the measure - HB 1937 - aims to restore some dignity to the act of traveling. A second proposal, HB 1938, seeks to prohibit the use of full-body scanners in Texas airports. A vast majority of Texas state lawmakers support the legislation.

Few Americans doubt the need for increased security at airports, given the tragedy of 9/11. Most reasonable people understand the government's interest in preventing similar attacks. But feeling up 6-year-old girls? Molesting a former Miss America? And what about the TSA agent in Philly who was recently arrested on charges he was in possession of child pornography? That's not even the first time that's happened.

The Texas legislation may just be the beginning. There is a backlash growing against the overly invasive TSA pat-down procedures. Both pilots - who are also subject to such searches - as well as passengers, in growing numbers, have had enough. Even airports are opting out of using the TSA for airport "security."

The legislation in Texas may not hold up to a constitutional challenge from the U.S. Justice Department, which is sure to come if state lawmakers pass it and Gov. Rick Perry signs it into law. But the point is clear: People have had enough, and it's time for the government to listen.

There are better ways to provide airport security other than violating the constitutional rights of young passengers, beauty queens and everyone else in between.

Civil Asset Forfeitures: Not Just for Drug Crimes

Suit seeks to change law on civil asset forfeitures
By BRIAN ROGERS
HOUSTON CHRONICLE
May 12, 2010, 10:22PM

In a police parking lot in east Houston sits a red 2004 Chevy Silverado, oblivious to the fact it is being sued.

No longer just the bane of international drug kingpins, asset forfeiture laws can target money and property used in myriad crimes including, in this case, felony DWIs.

Now, a Washington, D.C. law firm and the American Civil Liberties Union want to use the lawsuit to change the laws governing civil asset forfeiture in Texas.

“Texas has some of the worst civil forfeiture laws in the country, and what's driving this is the fact that police and prosecutors get to keep the property they seize,” said Scott Bullock, an attorney with the Institute for Justice, a D.C.-based libertarian law firm studying civil forfeiture laws nationwide. “They can use it to buy better equipment, to buy better automobiles, even to pay salaries, and we feel is an untoward profit incentive.”

Legislators and Harris County prosecutors say forfeiture laws are fair and work.

“It's criminals paying for investigations and law enforcement,” said Karen Morris, chief of the Harris County District Attorney's civil asset forfeiture division. “It eases the burden on taxpayers.”

The truck in the middle of the dispute has gathered dust more than a year after being confiscated from Robert Faustino, a Houston man arrested, convicted and sentenced to six years in jail for driving while drunk.

Faustino agreed to buy the truck for $20,000 in 2004 from Zahar El-Ali, who said he still is owed $2,350. El-Ali wants the truck returned to him.

‘My truck doesn't drink'

The Harris County DA's office wants to sell the truck, pay El-Ali what he is owed — which it estimated at about $300 — and put the rest in its asset forfeiture fund to be used for law enforcement-related purposes.

Under state law, the seized property is sued. Anyone with an interest in it, like El-Ali, is a third-party claimant.

“Innocent owners like me should not have their property taken without being convicted of a crime,” El-Ali contended. “My truck doesn't drink. My truck didn't do anything wrong.”
Morris said El-Ali is not an “innocent owner.”

“He's a lien holder,” Morris said. “As a lien holder, his interests are absolutely protected. And he will get his $300.”

Typically, Morris said, if a seized vehicle is worth more than the loan, the vehicle is auctioned and the lien holder is paid first. If the vehicle is worth less than the loan, the lien holder can just get the vehicle back.

“There are two types of forfeiture,” she said. “Either you're doing it to deprive them of ill-gotten gains, or you're doing it to protect society. In this case, we're taking the truck from Mr. Faustino so he doesn't drive drunk again when he gets out of jail.”
Call for accountability

Representatives for the Institute of Justice have filed arguments challenging the constitutionality of the law.

“The goals in this case are to get Mr. El-Ali's truck back and to change Texas law to better protect property owners,” Bullock explained.

The ACLU also takes issue with the law, arguing that there are not enough checks or accountability in the system, said Vanita Gupta, director of the national ACLU's Center for Justice

“The concern that we have about civil asset forfeiture laws generally, and in Texas specifically, is that they sort of lend themselves to the likelihood of abuse,” Gupta said. “The barriers for a victim of asset forfeiture to actually be able to establish that he or she is the rightful owner of legitimately obtained money are so incredibly high. The money is too easy for law enforcement.”

Abuses elsewhere

Forfeiture laws in Texas and across the country have come under fire from several angles, including the Legislature, after abuses in other parts of Texas surfaced.

Despite cases of abuse, State Sen. John Whitmire, who chairs the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, said the law is sound policy.

Whitmire authored a bill during the last session that would have limited some of law enforcement's powers in forfeiture cases. The measure died in the House.

Morris said the Harris County District Attorney's office worked with Whitmire on changing the law, and does not oppose increased regulations.

She said her division files more than 80 such cases a month and typically takes in between $6 million and $8 million a year, mostly money tracked to drug transactions. Last year, a single stock fraud case boosted the amount to a total of $12 million.