Author: Jonathan Corbett

Jon Corbett is a civil rights attorney known for filing the first lawsuit against the deployment of TSA nude body scanners, as well as defeating the body scanners live in "How to Get ANYTHING Through TSA Nude Body Scanners." Twitter: @_JonCorbett, Web: https://professional-troublemaker.com/

TSA Screener Shot, Killed By Man Who “Wanted To Instill Fear In Their Traitorous Minds”

Last Friday, a man walked into LAX airport on a mission to kill TSA screeners. In the end, 1 screener lost his life, and 3 more were injured before police were able to stop him.

Police reported that documents left by the shooter indicate that his motive was to strike back at an abusive government. Writing an “FU” to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, his goal was to “instill fear in their traitorous minds.”

The fact that this man resorted to violence is tragic. But it’s hardly surprising. The TSA has been the poster child for an agency that has spat on the rights of the people: physically strip-searching elderly women, leaving the disabled covered in urine, and using technology to virtually strip search Americans who simply want to get where they are going. They treat the public like cattle, and that a presumably mentally unstable man would eventually snap and decide that violence is the answer is to be expected.

It also highlights a point I’ve made many times before: the TSA, in implementing absurd security theatre that creates massive queues in a gun-free zone, creates the perfect target for a would-be terrorist:

By using procedures that take significantly longer than the prior metal detector search (a few seconds per passenger), the nude body scanners (22 seconds per passenger) and pat-downs (about 3 minutes per passenger) extend the security lines, creating a terrorist’s dream target of hundreds of unarmed travelers plus dozens of unarmed federal officers.

There is no reason for a terrorist to sneak through security when he or she can create just as much mayhem at the checkpoint itself.

The fallen TSA screener is not responsible for the abusive government we have today, regardless of whether you argue that he was supporting the oppression of the people by working for such an agency. The President, his cabinet, and our legislators are to blame, and we can fix that with ballots, not guns.

15

Government Censors Send Me “Final Copy” Of My Own Brief

Continueth down the rabbit hole, it appears we must do. After the 11th Circuit clerk’s office accidentally published my brief containing embarrassing quotes from the TSA’s own administratively classified records — provided to me under seal and a court order of secrecy — the government went into full damage control mode. I soon received a call from the court and from the Department of Justice, threatening that even though these documents that they accidentally released were now published all over the Internet (Infowars, Boing Boing, Courthouse News, and even some MSM, such as Philly.com), I must refrain from any discussion of the topic since, in their view, these documents, which have literally reached the screens of millions of people at this point, are still sealed.

I filed a motion asking the court to clarify for the government that I can talk about information that is in the public domain. While I wait for that ruling, I received an e-mail from the DoJ today which purported to have a government-approved “final, redacted copy” of my own brief. Which is funny, because I produced and filed a “public” copy that redacted any discussion of the sealed documents entirely, and because the court in no way gave the government permission to redact my filings. I looked through their redacted version, and it appears the only sentence that they redacted that I did not is the following:

CENSORED BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT [?]

The government’s claim that this is secret information is, frankly, bullshit. Anyone paying attention to the news knows that no terrorist has taken — or even attempted to take — explosives on an airplane through a domestic airport since before 9/11. How far before 9/11? Well, as I explained on March 6th, 2012 — more than a full year before the government provided me any sensitive documents — in my infamous video beating the TSA’s worthless nude body scanners, it’s been nearly 40 years:

When the machines came out, we were told that the invasion on our privacy, doses of radiation, and trashing of our Constitution were necessary because the old metal detectors weren’t good enough. That “non-metallic explosives” were a threat, even though no one has boarded a plane in the US with any type of explosive in nearly 40 years.

So no, DoJ, I won’t be censoring that line, and I won’t stop talking about the fact that, based on any rational review of public documents in my possession well before your sealed docs, you have zero basis for your continuing to scare the American people by telling them that airplanes will “go BOOM” if we don’t allow you to molest us at airports.

Freedom is not living under a government censor telling me that I can’t point out the elephant in the room.

12

Hell Frozen Over: Dianne Feinstein Says NSA Went Too Far

The NSA hasn’t had a lot of big fans since the June revelations that show it decided that U.S. terrorism laws designed to allow wiretaps of terrorists actually allowed it to wiretap the entire country (not to mention most of the rest of the world). But there has been one consistent fan girl: Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Chariman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Dianne seemed to be perhaps the only one in Congress who was actually up-to-date on the NSA’s mass spying and has defended it from the start. She has maintained that it is both constitutional and necessary for the government to record the source, destination, and duration of every phone call made within the U.S., proclaiming:

The call-records program is not surveillance. It does not collect the content of any communication, nor do the records include names or locations. The NSA only collects the type of information found on a telephone bill: phone numbers of calls placed and received, the time of the calls and duration. The Supreme Court has held this “metadata” is not protected under the Fourth Amendment.

Each and every defense of the NSA’s programs she has used has since crumbled. In August, for example, she stated that the NSA has “never… intentionally abused its authority,” when a few days later it came out that NSA analysts would routinely spy on love interests.

But apparently, last week’s revelations are indefensible, even for Dianne “<3s NSA" Feinstein. Upon the disclosure from the Snowden archives that the government was wiretapping the leaders of our closest allies, Dianne admits (or should I say, "claims") that she had not been filled in with all the details of the NSA's work, and commented, “let me state unequivocally: I am totally opposed.”

With that, it seems the NSA is fresh out of friends. It finally also shows that the NSA has always been fresh out of oversight: when the Senate Intelligence Committee and (allegedly) the President don’t even know what a federal agency is up to, who the hell does?

2

#StopWatchingUs NSA Protest in DC Last Saturday

NSA Protest in DC 10/26/2013I made the trip down to DC for the StopWatching.Us protest. SWU is a coalition of a large group of civil rights advocates, including some big names like the ACLU and EFF. The rally was personally endorsed by Edward Snowden — how could I say no to that?!

Several hundred protesters marched from Union Station to the reflecting pool at the National Mall and stayed for hours with one simple demand: no more mass spying on the American people. Speakers included the legendary Bruce Schneier, information security guru and general badass in the name of privacy, and the beautiful October day was the perfect day to be out in DC.

Being Halloween week, I couldn’t resist going in costume, and, of course, the AP caught me (I’m the red monster :D):

Monsters Protest

It was great to see so many faces out there demanding change. We definitely need more of these events! If you find one that’s within your reach, please make the time to attend.

2

Life Lesson for a Civil Rights Advocate: You Can’t Fix Everything

One of the most difficult things I’ve found about doing civil rights advocacy is this: there are so many things wrong in this country, and you can’t make time to fight them all. Once you learn that it is, in fact, possible to challenge the injustices in this world (and that many times, if you don’t challenge them, no one else does), it becomes far too tempting to just take on another issue. When Edward Snowden’s revelations about the NSA came out, for example, it took all my willpower to not write up a lawsuit. (I couldn’t resist having a little fun, and created a Web site for people to request their NSA file called My NSA Records, but no legal challenges from me.)

If one takes on too many challenges, sufficient focus to complete any of the challenges will be lost. Indeed, sufficient focus to maintain the rest of your life can become lost as well, especially if you’re working a full-time job in addition to fighting the man (if anyone would like to sponsor a full-time civil rights advocate, let me know!).

The same goes for continuing current cases when they’ve lost meaning. My case against NYPD stop-and-frisk was dismissed last month after a judge ruled that I couldn’t prove that I was dealing with actual police officers. Four men, who looked like cops, in a dark sedan that looked like an undercover cop car (complete with console electronics) identified themselves as police, detained me, searched me with neither consent nor cause, and then let me go without taking anything. I didn’t ask for a badge because I thought I’d get a face full of sidewalk and because I had no doubt that these men were real cops, but the city claims they have no record of cops being there.

It makes no sense that these men were just random troublemakers looking to pat down random people on the street, and I believe the judge made a clear error in determining that no reasonable jury could find that the NYPD was responsible for my constitutional injury. But, taking that argument to the Court of Appeals, I believe, will take my focus off of the cases that are more important to me — my work against the TSA — and in light of the fact that stop-and-frisk was recently ruled unconstitutional in another case, I’ve decided it would be a distraction with minimal benefit. The war on stop-and-frisk has, hopefully, already been won.

The people who are the best at what they do are the best because they have the sharpest focus. They know what they want and they work every day to get it. I shall continue to sharpen my focus on the issues that are really important to me.

9

Great Write-Up of My TSA Case & The Leaked Documents

Today is Day 5 of the TSA’s censoring of my speech after the Court accidentally leaked a brief of mine containing administratively classified information embarrassing to their cause. Courthouse News put out an excellent summary of both my case and the circumstances of the leaked brief, as well as a text version of the leaked brief itself. Since I’m not allowed to speak, I’ll let them speak for me:

> Courthouse News: Defense of Airport Body Scanners Undermined

Want to donate to the fight against TSA assholery? PayPal or Bitcoin: 15ftA2938sp7Mnsi8U7wYVmEtd4BRbFnkT

3

Motion to Clarify Gag Order Filed

Last week, after Infowars published a version of a brief I filed that the court was supposed to keep private due to administratively classified contents, the court and the government attorney on the case contacted me and told me that I may not discuss the leaked brief, even though it was published to no less than millions of people through Infowars, Boing Boing, Reddit, Hacker News, Facebook, Twitter, etc. etc. etc.

They base this assertion on a court order from last June precluding me from “disclosing” sealed records. But, if the records have already been disclosed to the public, talking about them further is not “disclosure” in any meaningful sense of the word. To avoid the possibility of being in contempt of a court order, should the court concur with the asinine argument put forth by the DoJ, I’ve agreed to cease discussion of the contents of the leaked brief pending a motion to the court to clarify their order, which I filed today:

[I]f a piece of information exists within a document sitting in a sealed file in the clerk’s office, while that information also exists within a document located in a public forum, it could fairly be said that any discussion of said information by Petitioner is discussion of the public forum’s copy of the information. Barring Petitioner from discussing information that exists in both a sealed document and the public domain would produce anomalous effects that would severely and unnecessarily limit his speech. For example, if the government had sealed a top secret analysis of “an alien landing in the center of Turner Field at 755 Hank Aaron Drive,” would Respondent be barred from publicly saying that Turner Field is at 755 Hank Aaron Drive, or merely be prohibited from discussing the alien? Petitioner feels that the former is clearly not the intent of the Court’s June 5th, 2013 order, and accordingly, the Court’s intent was only to bar Petitioner from disseminating information unavailable to the public.

Needless to say, the U.S. Attorney on the case is pissed, and promptly sent off a tirade to the court, CC’d to me, about improper service since the copy of my motion she received via e-mail wasn’t signed (and yep, the appellate court rules actually allow for service via e-mail!). So, I rolled my eyes and sent her a signed copy, and now a judge will determine whether I may speak about the leaked doc.

Corbett v. DHS – Motion for Clarification II (.pdf)

8

Censored! Department of Justice Demands That I Stop Talking About Leaked TSA Document

I received a call from the clerk’s office of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stating that opposing counsel (the government) has complained to the Court that I am violating the order sealing the documents upon which my brief is based by talking about their contents — even though the contents of those documents were (accidentally) published by the Court, and then reproduced in the media. I called the attorney on the case, Sharon Swingle of the U.S. Department of Justice, who confirmed that the government’s position is that I have violated court order and must take down the blog post in question.

I tried explaining to Ms. Swingle that the document had been published by a third party and that I was simply discussing that now-public document. I tried explaining to Ms. Swingle how absurd it would be to say that any third party can talk about anything in that document they wanted, but that I was somehow barred. I tried explaining to Ms. Swingle the Streisand Effect, and that she will now be drawing more attention to the documents that the government wants hidden from the public. Ms. Swingle continued to insist that the government’s position was that I must take the comments down, and so I have.

I will file a motion with the court to clarify whether I may comment on a public document, and if permission is granted, I will re-publish my statement. Until then, you’ll have to read through the documents at the article published by Infowars or any of the others who have picked the story up.

Here is the order that the government says I’m violating by talking about a document that was found and published by a third party: Corbett v. TSA – Gag Order

Want to donate to the fight against TSA assholery? PayPal or Bitcoin: 15ftA2938sp7Mnsi8U7wYVmEtd4BRbFnkT

26

TSA Admits In Leaked Doc: No Evidence of Terrorist Plots Against Aviation in US

A couple weeks ago, I filed a brief in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in my case challenging the constitutionality of the TSA’s nude body scanners and invasive pat-down program. My brief was based on documents that the TSA provided me that were administratively classified as sensitive, and I was ordered not to disclose any of their contents publicly, so I filed a “public” (redacted) brief LINK CENSORED BY THE U.S. GOVERNMENT [?], as well as a “sealed” brief that the Court was not to publish.

Apparently that plan didn’t go so well, as journalists from Infowars discovered that the Court actually failed to seal the unredacted brief, and they have published in full the leaked document. The document — as of yet still available to the public through the PACER court records system — is properly labeled as “sealed” by the clerk’s office, meaning they received and understood my instructions that the document was not to be public, but neglected to hide the attachment from public view.

The information revealed, which I may now comment on since a third party has made it publicly available, is [The rest of this blog post has been censored by the U.S. Government. An attorney with the Department of Justice has contacted me to inform me that despite the fact that they screwed up and released the document, and a third party has already made the document public, I may not talk about it]

Thank you, clerk of the court, for sharing this with the public.

Want to donate to the fight against TSA assholery? PayPal or Bitcoin: 15ftA2938sp7Mnsi8U7wYVmEtd4BRbFnkT

22

Brief Filed in Last Remaining Court Case Against TSA Nude Body Scanners & Pat Downs

I’ve been working on this one for a while now. After pawing through several thousand pages of the TSA’s “administrative record” (their alleged rationale behind why they must photograph us naked and literally put their hands in our pants to search us), I filed yesterday a 56 page brief in my case against scope & grope. This is the last remaining challenge to the TSA’s October 2010 decision to invade our bodies and turn already annoying security theatre into blatant sexual assault on the scale of 1.8 million passengers per day. As best I’m aware, all other cases have been tossed, and their filers will not be following up with further appeals.

I’ll be posting as much as I can of the administrative record — some of it is sealed for various reasons — over the course of the coming days, and will be highlighting several revelations of which I don’t think the public is yet aware. I’ll also be working to get the remaining documents unsealed, as one of the sealed records contains an admission that entirely undermines the TSA’s (already weak) justifications for its invasive behavior.

Meanwhile, the US Attorney on my case is furloughed, of course. 😉

Corbett v. DHS – Appellate Brief – Public (.pdf) CENSORED BY U.S. GOVERNMENT [?]
Corbett v. DHS – Appellate Brief – Exhibits (.pdf)
Corbett v. DHS – Appellate Brief – Declaration (.pdf)

Want to donate to the fight against TSA assholery? PayPal or Bitcoin: 15ftA2938sp7Mnsi8U7wYVmEtd4BRbFnkT

22

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑