***UPDATE*** Final version completed, filed, and attached.
Much of the work in a federal lawsuit is not in the courtroom, but rather in written arguments. Right now, a motion for a preliminary injunction is in front of the court, and the US replied in opposition (naturally — see previous post on blog). I’ve spent much of this week preparing a reply to their opposition, and I think I’ve produced a quality argument.
Let’s make it even better. Some of you may have legal experience, many likely do not, but it doesn’t require a law degree to make a coherent argument. So, I open the floor to you for your review, thoughts, ideas, and suggestions. Anything from a comma out of place to a great piece of case law you read that you think might fit.
My draft document is attached. Some rules:
1) The document gets filed on Monday, so the earlier you reply, the better. The latest reply that I can look at before filing is Monday at 9:00 AM.
2) This is essentially a reply to the government’s reply. Please read the government’s reply first (previous post). As background information, the motion at hand is a motion for preliminary injunction against the TSA using nude body scanners on me or “touching my junk.” (Preliminary injunctions are supposed to be narrow in scope, which is why the motion only relates to me, however if the motion is granted, the door is open for anyone to sue to get relief, not to mention the TSA will be forced re-look at their actions!)
3) You can post your thoughts in the comments or e-mail me directly -> jon at fourtentech.com.
4) Nothing will be construed as “legal advice.” You are either not a lawyer or are a lawyer giving a personal, non-professional opinion only. No attorney-client relationship created, and no compensation due.
Thanks for helping! I know that we all wish that there were something we could do to make this better, and hopefully this is a step in that direction. Together we can beat them!
–Jon
Reply to Opp to TRO (.pdf) (FINAL VERSION)
Professional Troublemaker ® 
I think, Jon, that the straw that might just break the camel’s back is the argument that the TSA has set up shop in subway (NY), train (NM, GA) and bus stations (FL). Being that just about covers all non-automobile travel possibilities, it is getting harder and harder for the government to argue “just don’t fly.” There is long-standing legal precedent (cited in US v. Fofana, for example) that lists as a criteria for administrative search the caveat that people must be allowed to choose to not fly.” So taking this to the logical conclusion, people must also be allowed to choose not to take a subway, bus or train. Well, now there’s the quandary: it appears that people must agree to not use ANY public transportation. Now we have introduced a compelling argument to the “general good” excuse, i.e., while everyone agrees that there is compelling societal reason to keep planes from blowing up, there is also compelling societal good to providing public transportation, and it is not reasonable to demand that people give up all public transportation. Too bad you don’t have an artificial leg like me – this is an argument that I can very convincingly make. For me, there isn’t even an AIT machine (which I am against) that will protect me from a pat-down. 100% of the time. So follow me here: disabled people are disproportionately reliant on public transportation. They also are 100% subject to pat-down. Therefore those that are reliant on public transportation cannot – CANNOT – travel by any means except taxi, for any reason. Now, I ask you, does this not start to look as if there is a distinct group of second-class citizens? Why not just pin yellow stars on their sleeves?
Damn good thing I have my own car…..
Fabulous comment. The fact is that invasive security state tactics disproportionately impact traditional special classes for which the federal government has previously afforded special
protections, namely women, minorities, religious practitioners, elders, and the handicapped. Individuals in these special classes are now being singled out for special abuse by the security state.
Jon, thank you for your heroic individual stand against this monstrous attack on our civil liberties. However, I am dumbfounded that patriots like you are having to take individual action. Where the hell is the American Bar, the universities, women’ s organizations, and the churches?! As Judge Napalitano said recently, whole sections of the US Constitution/
Bill of Rights have been voided without so much as a discussion.
With so much money flowing into police state operations at all levels, corrupting politicians
at all levels, our only hope is the court system. Yet, where are the major cases and prominent attorneys?