Texas Bills Introduced to Ban Full Body Scanners

[Snap E Tom]

"Rep. David Simpson (R-Longview) introduced a package of bills into the Texas House of Representatives on Tuesday that would challenge the TSA’s authority in a number of ways. The first bill, HB 1938, prohibits full body scanning equipment in any Texas airport and provides for criminal and civil penalties on any airport operator who installs the equipment. The second bill, HB 1937, criminalizes touching without consent and searches without probable cause."

http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/20 ... sa-agents/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I hope these bills have a chance. It will be interesting to see what Perry does if they make it that far.

[terryg]

[Dave2]

That's a great first step. I think an amendment to deal with this would make it complete.

[alvins]

i think they need to use a better term then probable cause. they can and will find a reason to search you if thats what they want.

[Excaliber]

i think they need to use a better term then probable cause. they can and will find a reason to search you if thats what they want.

Probable cause is a carefully legally defined term. It is already the standard that must be met for obtaining a search warrant or providing grounds for arrest.

[jordanmills]

Sounds GREAT. You best write your reps and Simpson in support of this!

[TxKimberMan]

The TSA will likely challenge such a law, but the Texas legislature stands on solid ground. Local governments control airports and no enumerated power in the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to regulate them. Under the Tenth Amendment, airport operation falls under state jurisdiction.

If the bills pass, and I hope they do, this will be an interesting fight between the Feds / Texas / and the airlines. If passed and Texas prevails as predicted in the OP's linked article above, it will leave the airlines hanging, with regard to their compliance with the FAA / TSA and Title 49 requirements.

[pcgizzmo]

Federal Trumps state I'm afraid. My guess is the airports will keep the scanners.

[jordanmills]

Federal Trumps state I'm afraid. My guess is the airports will keep the scanners.

Who told you that nonsense? And what law says they have to use scanners and groping?

[pcgizzmo]

Federal Trumps state I'm afraid. My guess is the airports will keep the scanners.

Who told you that nonsense? And what law says they have to use scanners and groping?

Federal Laws trump any conflicting state law and if that law is passed there would be a conflicting state law. I'm married to an attorney.

Article IV of the Constitution

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

I will say there have been court battles over this in certain situations most notably health related cases.

Here is an example. In California medical marijuana is legal. Federal law does not recognize this and for the most part the feds have left it alone but they don't have to. They could easily arrest someone for possession or distribution under federal law. Heres an article for you on that.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 68572.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jordanmills]

Federal Trumps state I'm afraid. My guess is the airports will keep the scanners.

Who told you that nonsense? And what law says they have to use scanners and groping?

Federal Laws trump any conflicting state law and if that law is passed there would be a conflicting state law. I'm married to an attorney.

Article IV of the Constitution

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

I will say there have been court battles over this in certain situations most notably health related cases.

Here is an example. In California medical marijuana is legal. Federal law does not recognize this and for the most part the feds have left it alone but they don't have to. They could easily arrest someone for possession or distribution under federal law. Heres an article for you on that.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 68572.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I ask you again, what law requires the TSA use naked cancer scanners and groping? The state law stands on its own.

[PBratton]

Federal Trumps state I'm afraid. My guess is the airports will keep the scanners.

Who told you that nonsense? And what law says they have to use scanners and groping?

Federal Laws trump any conflicting state law and if that law is passed there would be a conflicting state law. I'm married to an attorney.

Article IV of the Constitution

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

I will say there have been court battles over this in certain situations most notably health related cases.

Here is an example. In California medical marijuana is legal. Federal law does not recognize this and for the most part the feds have left it alone but they don't have to. They could easily arrest someone for possession or distribution under federal law. Heres an article for you on that.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 68572.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I ask you again, what law requires the TSA use naked cancer scanners and groping? The state law stands on its own.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it, but:

If this stands, then all other airports, domestic and international, could refuse landing rights to any carrier leaving a Texas airport...

Bet this goes away quickly.

[pcgizzmo]

Federal Trumps state I'm afraid. My guess is the airports will keep the scanners.

Who told you that nonsense? And what law says they have to use scanners and groping?

Federal Laws trump any conflicting state law and if that law is passed there would be a conflicting state law. I'm married to an attorney.

Article IV of the Constitution

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

I will say there have been court battles over this in certain situations most notably health related cases.

Here is an example. In California medical marijuana is legal. Federal law does not recognize this and for the most part the feds have left it alone but they don't have to. They could easily arrest someone for possession or distribution under federal law. Heres an article for you on that.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 68572.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I ask you again, what law requires the TSA use naked cancer scanners and groping? The state law stands on its own.

No, your first question was "Who told you that nonsense?". I then gave you a link to the Constitution and told you my wife was an attorney so that's how I knew. The scanners do not cause cancer. They use radio waves. Do you you have a cell phone? Possibly hold it up to your ear? There's more chance of cancer from that then these scanner.

I don't agree with the aggressive pat downs or any pat downs for that matter but the fact still remains that the TSA is a federal agency given unfortunate broad power to make rules governing air travel. Their rules are law based on the powers given to them by the government until someone takes them to court and can get them ruled illegal otherwise. States can pass all the laws they want about not allowing the scanners but the are preempted by federal law.

I don't like it either but it is what it is.

[jordanmills]

Federal Trumps state I'm afraid. My guess is the airports will keep the scanners.

Who told you that nonsense? And what law says they have to use scanners and groping?

Federal Laws trump any conflicting state law and if that law is passed there would be a conflicting state law. I'm married to an attorney.

Article IV of the Constitution

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

I will say there have been court battles over this in certain situations most notably health related cases.

Here is an example. In California medical marijuana is legal. Federal law does not recognize this and for the most part the feds have left it alone but they don't have to. They could easily arrest someone for possession or distribution under federal law. Heres an article for you on that.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 68572.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I ask you again, what law requires the TSA use naked cancer scanners and groping? The state law stands on its own.

No, your first question was "Who told you that nonsense?". I then gave you a link to the Constitution and told you my wife was an attorney so that's how I knew. The scanners do not cause cancer. They use radio waves. Do you you have a cell phone? Possibly hold it up to your ear? There's more chance of cancer from that then these scanner.

I don't agree with the aggressive pat downs or any pat downs for that matter but the fact still remains that the TSA is a federal agency given unfortunate broad power to make rules governing air travel. Their rules are law based on the powers given to them by the government until someone takes them to court and can get them ruled illegal otherwise. States can pass all the laws they want about not allowing the scanners but the are preempted by federal law.

I don't like it either but it is what it is.

They can figure it out from jail then.

[karl]

I agree with pcgizzmo. This law would constitute a governing of interstate commerce and therefore would interfere with federal laws, landing it under the jurisdiction of the supremacy clause as has been quoted.

Nobody will be going to jail either.