Blogs > Liberty and Power > This Hurts Big Brother More Than It Hurts You

Jun 13, 2004

This Hurts Big Brother More Than It Hurts You




[cross-posted at Austro-Athenian Empire]

I've spent the past week teaching at the Mises University, and the weekend before that at a Liberty Fund conference in Milwaukee (a surprisingly beautiful city, by the way). Hence the eerie lull in my blogging; things should pick up now.

On my return from Milwaukee I found the following red-white-and-blue love-note in my checked luggage:

NOTIFICATION OF BAGGAGE INSPECTION

To protect you and your fellow passengers, the Transport Security Administration (TSA) is required by law to inspect all checked baggage. As part of this process, some bags are opened and physically inspected. Your bag was among those selected for physical inspection.

During the inspection, your bag and its contents may have been searched for prohibited items. At the completion of the inspection, the contents were returned to your bag, which was resealed.

If the TSA screener was unable to open your bag for inspection because it was locked, the screener may have been forced to break the locks on your bag. TSA sincerely regrets having to do this, and has taken care to reseal your bag upon completion of inspection. However, TSA is not liable for damage to your locks resulting from this necessary security precaution.
The note closes by thanking me (rather presumptuously) for my"understanding and cooperation."

On the reverse of the note, the same message is repeated in Spanish, except that the footnote identifying the relevant statute (Section 110(b) of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2001, 49 U.S.C. § 44901(c)-(e), if you're curious) has been omitted (though not the footnote marker), as has the cryptic slogan"Smart Security Saves Time."

What a bunch of lies. The TSA is not"required by law" to inspect my baggage, since no statute in conflict with the Fourth Amendment has any validity as law. Had my baggage been locked (it wasn’t), the TSA screener would not have been"forced" to damage my property; where's the"force"? Nor is there any reason to suppose that the TSA"sincerely regrets" any of this. If folks at the TSA really are agonising over their participation in warrantless searches, they are free to quit any time and start looking for honest work.


comments powered by Disqus