Rowyn (rowyn) wrote,
Rowyn
rowyn

H.R. 6416 – The American Traveler Dignity Act

Representative Ron Paul introduced a bill to stop the new screening procedures, and in fact to roll some of the existing ones back. The bill is amusing:

H.R. 6416 – The American Traveler Dignity Act
A BILL
To ensure that certain Federal employees cannot hide behind immunity.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. NO IMMUNITY FOR CERTAIN AIRPORT SCREENING METHODS.
No law of the United States shall be construed to confer any immunity for a Federal employee or agency or any individual or entity that receives Federal funds, who subjects an individual to any physical contact (including contact with any clothing the individual is wearing), x-rays, or millimeter waves, or aids in the creation of or views a representation of any part of a individual’s body covered by clothing as a condition for such individual to be in an airport or to fly in an aircraft. The preceding sentence shall apply even if the individual or the individual’s parent, guardian, or any other individual gives consent.


That's the whole thing. It's a very Ron Paul bill, not just in that it's short, but in the way he goes about it: which is to point out that the screening procedures are not things that an ordinary citizen can legally compel another citizen to submit to, so all he has to do is say "the law applies to TSA agents too" and hey, we're done.

Unfortunately, Dr. Ron Paul is regarded as rather a wingnut in Congress, so I don't know how much of a shot the bill has. And it doesn't do anything about the other stupid crap the TSA is doing (like "no liquids"). But at least it's a start.

Also, it's short. It's rather charming. Reminds me of the Constitution.
Tags: politics, tsa
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 27 comments