In my new lawsuit regarding being kicked out of FLL airport and then lied to about the existence of security camera footage, Broward County responded in record time with a poorly grounded motion to dismiss. I filed my reply today (below).

Keep on the lookout for my new video! I’m thinking Monday or Tuesday. 🙂

Corbett v. TSA – Motion to Dismiss Opposition (.pdf)

Broward County responded to my new lawsuit (for abuse while kicking me out of FLL airport after I would not let them touch my genitals) in record time with a Motion to Dismiss (document below). Their motion is full of nonsense and will not stand (except perhaps requiring me to amend the complaint to name the Broward County Sherrif’s office as well), but it will actually do them more harm than good. Worthy of note:

TSA informed County that the subject CCTV recordings at TSA checkpoints, including the mere existence thereof, constituted Sensitive Security Information.

The County, back in September, flatly denied that security tapes of me being threatened by a Transportation Security Manager existed. I took this to mean that they weren’t in the county’s possession and therefore the security cameras must belong to the TSA. But, when the TSA also denied their existence a few months later, Broward county admitted that they did own the security cameras, but that “if” tapes exist, they cannot be released because they are “Sensitive Security Information.”

The idea that the government can lie about records because it thinks they are “sensitive” is founded neither in law nor in the hallmarks of a free country. Both the federal FOIA and the Florida Public Records Act require that documents either be disclosed or they be denied with a reason. There is no provision for falsely denying their existence (which is incredibly stupid given that there are at least 13 visible cameras or camera domes at the FLL E gates checkpoint), with the limited exception of confidential informants or classified foreign intelligence. See Shura v. FBI, Order, Docket #98 (CDCA 2011), p. 13.

The TSA thinks it’s ok to lie to us. This isn’t anything new: they lied to us when they said the nude body scanners were safe, were effective, were not able to save/print images. They lie to us about how they treat the elderly (her story), women, and children (watch in horror as the TSA screener puts her hands inside the child’s pants before rubbing her chest and genitals… how many times has the TSA said they don’t do this to kids?!). It’s not ok for our government to lie to us, even if they think it’s for our own good. This organization needs to be dismantled, and the body scanners are a great place to start. Please share this story so that those who patriotically tust their government know that this particular government agency is abusing that trust.

Corbett v. TSA – Broward County’s Motion to Dismiss (.pdf)

After thoroughly embarassing the TSA on the international stage:

…my battle in the courts continues. The brief summary for new readers is that my lawsuit against the nude body scanners and molestation pat-downs was dismissed from U.S. District Court by stretching a jurisdictional statute that requires challenges of TSA “orders” to be filed instead in the U.S. Courts of Appeals. I challenged the constitutionality of this (the result of which would abridge my right to a jury trial, discovery, witnesses, etc.) with an appeal, which was rejected by the 11th Circuit who suggested that I could file in a Court of Appeals and ask the Court of Appeals to order a District Court to hear the case. The absurdity of the idea that I can’t file in one court but can file in another court only to be referred back to that original court notwithstanding, as they wish: the motion I filed today asks the court to do just that.

Of course, there are wrinkes. To start, the court doesn’t have to approve my request. The notion of asking a court for “permission” to challenge my government is repulsive — I demand my challenge as of right! But, if asking nicely gets this issue resolved faster than a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court would, so be it. The second wrinkle is that the TSA, after essentially winning the appeal, in a highly unusual move filed its own motion, basically saying, “No you’ve got it wrong. You were right to deny him his day in court, but wrong to suggest you can give him a day in court by ordering a District Court to hear it.”

So, now pending before the court is the government’s motion to change its decision to omit the part about me being able to get back to District Court “the long way,” as well as my cross-motion, which says, essentially, that if the court agrees with the government, my right to due process is gone. Therefore, if the court wants to grant the government’s motion, it must declare the resulting outcome unconstitutional and send me to District Court. And, if the court denies the motion, please transfer the case to the Court of Appeals and then order a District Court hearing. Either way, you may have noticed that I’m a fan of being heard in District Court. 😉

Corbett v. US – TSA Motion for Reconsideration
Corbett v. US – Corbett Motion for Reconsideration

After filing my new lawsuit against the TSA for kicking me out of FLL airport 6 months ago, I went to RSW airport in hopes of having a nude body scanner-free travel experience to see my little sister get married. I got half way through a pat down before the screener realized that he wouldn’t be able to complete the pat down without “touching my junk.”

RSW used to be a safe airport, but unfortunately, RSW installed nude body scanners about 2 weeks ago. 😦 I was completely unaware (which is unusual ;)), and quite disappointed to turn a corner and see an L3 ATD millimeter wave device.

As per usual, I opted out, and the screener gives me the run down about what he’s going to do using “TSA-speak” (“use the back of my hands…”, “…meet resistance…”, etc.). I asked the TSA screener if that meant he’d be “touching my junk,” and he re-explained using TSA-speak. I then asked again, “Sooo… you’re going to be touching my junk?” and he thinks for a few seconds and, somewhat embarassed, conceeds, “Yeah, basically.” I tell him I won’t consent to touching my genitals, and will have to file a police report if he does.

Naturally, he calls over a supervisor, who gives me the same monologue. I repeat that I consent as long as he won’t be touching my genitals, and she tells me that she can call over a police officer to make sure that doesn’t happen. Mildly impressed that maybe I’d be able to watch my little sister walk down the aisle, I wait and within a couple minutes, a cop labeled “APD” (assuming Airport Police Department?) comes by, asks me if I have anything illegal (do people really say “yes” to that even if they do?), and the screener begins the pat-down by touching my hair. My hair, mind you, is about 2 inches long, but no matter.

He gets down to the waist area and then explains again to me the TSA speak. He demonstrates on his own body by putting his hands backwards at his belt about an inch apart and running them down from belt to thigh. I ask him how he intends to do that without touching my genitals, at which point an STSO stops him and tells me “we’re done” and that I’ll be escorted out.

So, there you have it, if there was any doubt left that TOUCHING YOUR GENITALS IS A MANDATORY PART OF THE TSA PAT DOWN SEARCH.

Working hard to continue the court stuff and more. This abuse has got to go, and now I’ve got to try and find a way to my little sister.

[Edit – One more thing. The STSO literally stole my boarding pass from me. She asked for my ID, which I refused to give her, and then said “fine, I’ll just take your boarding pass.” I never got it back. I may amend my lawsuit to add more Privacy Act claims regarding this, especially since I don’t have to wait for the 6 month FTCA notice period to lapse before I can go after them for that.]

–Jon

The TSA says that anything they write down is an “order” and above the jurisdiction of the District Courts.

Unfortunately for them, I think they might have forgot to write in their SOP that their new policy allows for false arrest, forcible searches, retaliatory searches, breaking federal recordkeeping laws, obstruction of justice, etc. — the claims in my new lawsuit from the day they kicked me out of FLL airport. I’m posting this public draft to you guys 2 days before I file it on Friday, so if you have any feedback, let me know! You don’t have to be a lawyer to help make my writing clearer, more powerful, and more likely to hit the TSA hard.

Corbett v. TSA – Public Draft (.pdf)

This suit really throws the book at them, quite carefully and with big thanks to the NYPD for forcing me to do the research on false arrests over the last several months. This 16-page, 21-count complaint charges the TSA along with Broward County for:

– A 4th Amendment violation for false arrest
– A 4th Amendment violation for reading my credit cards (no weapons in there, TSA!)
– A 4th Amendment violation for reading my books (no weapons there either, TSA!)
– A 4th Amendment violation for conducting a search in a retaliatory fashion
– A violation of the Civil Rights Act
– Assault
– False arrest (a state-law charge, in addition to the Constitutional claim)
– Falsely portraying me as a criminal in front of hundreds of passers-by
– Intentional infliction of emotional distress
– Failing to meet federal record data collection and record keeping requirements… 7 times
– Failing to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request
– Failing to truthfully respond to a Freedom of Information Act request (Broward)
– Conspiracy between the TSA and Broward for trying to hide the checkpoint video
– Running a warrant check without reasonable suspicion by non-consensually taking my ID (Broward)

If the TSA wants to stay out of District Court, they’re going to have to train their pizza box employees to abuse only within the limits of the SOP. 😉

This suit is new suit in addition to the petition I will file in the Supreme Court. This suit will not change the scope & grope policies, but it will make them be a little nicer while sexually harassing us and think twice before ordering you around. This suit (mostly) asks for large money damages rather than injunctive relief — and every dollar they pay for this suit is one less dollar they have to pay for a body scanner and one more dollar I have towards fighting scope & grope. 🙂 This suit will be entirely self-funded, and any of you who have or will donate should know that 100% of your donations will be applied to the petition to the Supreme Court to end scope & grope for all of us.

Looking forward to Friday!

Sadly, the judgment of the District Court in dismissing my case for lack of jurisdiction was affirmed today by a 3 judge panel at the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, in a decision that effectively states that Americans have no right to a jury trial when challenging their government.

Corbett v. US – Affirmed (.pdf)

The result of this decision is that virtually no policy made by the TSA can be challenged in U.S. District Court, which means that the TSA completely evades trial-by-jury and my right to gather and present evidence. The 11th Circuit ignores the discussion of a jury, and finds solitude in the fact that if I made my challenge in the Court of Appeals, they “may” allow me discovery, hearings, etc., but this wholly misses the point: my right to a fair jury trial complete with discovery, evidence, and witnesses are not given to me at the discretion of an appellate judge, but rather taken as a right I was born with as an American citizen.

I will be filing a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court as soon as practicable.

–Jon

The County, who initially denied the existance of checkpoint security tapes from the day I was ejected from a TSA security checkpoint at FLL, and I have been going back and forth about the releasability of the security cameras. Despite the fact that the TSA regularly releases security cameras footage as a result of formal or informal requests:

Woman brought to tears by TSA (At same airport! Uploaded by the TSA’s official account!)
TSA illegaly detains US Sen. Rand Paul at checkpoint
Andrea Abbott arrested for being upset about the TSA molesting her daughter
TSA separates family from little boy (Uploaded by the TSA’s official account)
Protester walks through TSA checkpoint in his underwear

…the video of me going through the checkpoint is “Sensitive Security Information” (SSI) and unreleasable, the TSA has told the County.

Well, guess what? Broward County has earned a spot as a co-defendant in the lawsuit that will be filed on February 29th, 2012. All levels of government need to understand that if they help the TSA do illegal things, it is conspiracy and they will be charged as such.

–Jon

Broward County has now confirmed for me that they own the security cameras, despite telling me that they are in possession of no video taken on the date and time in question. Then they added in this gem:

“Additionally, even if they did exist, we have been informed by the TSA that this particular information (security camera recordings) is … SSI.”

Broward County has some explaining to do. Do these cameras not actually record? Do videos exist, but they are denying their existance because of their (false) belief that they constitute SSI? (SSI is a designation internal to the TSA; a third party’s records cannot be SSI.) Have the videos now been disgarded?

…and I have some research to do: If a third party destroys evidence after being notified of the necessity to preserve evidence, what is their liability?

I’m sure most of you today read the big news about the TSA detaining U.S. Sen. Rand Paul. Surely Rand will wish to obtain a copy of the video footage of this incident, but like most who have requested checkpoint footage, it’s likely that footage simply “won’t exist.”

The TSA is finishing preparing (redacting) its reply to my FOIA request from the day the TSA detained me at FLL airport, but it has unofficially informed me that its reply will contain no video footage. Broward County, the owner of the airport, similarly said it has no video footage. Which is funny, because I distinctly remember waiving to a video camera as I exited the terminal.

So, who, exactly, owns these cameras?

We’ll find out soon.

–Jon