Update on John Gilmore's lawsuit over secret FAA regulations

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
R
Previous Politech message:

"John Gilmore sues Feds over secret your-papers-please rule"
http://www.politechbot.com/p-03776.html

---

To: declan () well com, gnu () new toad com
Subject: Re: FC: Transportation Security Admin. confirms do-not-fly list
In-reply-to: <5.1.1.6.0.20021114234904.0589a6d0 () mail well com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 02:16:58 -0800
From: John Gilmore <gnu () toad com>

The US Government has responded to my lawsuit challenging the
unpublished air-ID regulations.  In summary, they argue that I can't
challenge the no-fly list or anything other than the ID demand
because, having never shown ID, the no-fly list was not applied to me;
that I can't sue in a District Court anyway because the Court of
Appeals is supposed to have original jurisdiction; that the government
can make any rule it wants which relates to air security, and penalize
the public over violations, without ever telling the public what the
rule is; that being refused passage unless I present an ID does not
infringe my constitutional right to travel anyway; that being
prevented from traveling anoymously does not implicate any First
Amendment interests; that all forms of airport security are fully
constitutional 4th-Amendment searches; and that since my right to
travel is not being infringed, these searches give me equal protection
just like all members of the public, because any 'rational' reason for
singling me out will suffice.

The regulations I'm challenging purport to require air and train
travelers to show a "government issued ID".  Every traveler has been
subjected to these "requirements", but it turns out that they aren't
really required by any published law or regulation.  And if you refuse
to meet the supposed requirements, you find out that there are
alternative requirements, that they weren't telling you about.

It is easy for the government to single out members of Greenpeace, and
prevent them from flying using a no-fly list, by making everyone show
ID to fly.  (If no ID was required, any persecuted minority would soon
learn to fly under assumed names.)  The Nixon Administration had its
"enemies list", who it subjected to IRS audits and other harassment.
But even that evil President didn't prevent his "enemies" from
moving around the country to associate with anyone they liked.  The
Bush Administration's list interferes with freedom of association and
with the constitutional right to travel.

As my experience on July 4th, 2002, in the San Francisco airport
demonstrated, people are free to not show ID, if they spend half an
hour arguing with security personnel.  But then, catch-22, they can
board the plane only if they'll submit to a physical search like
the ones they subjected Green Party members and other "on the list"
people to.

So, you can identify yourself to them and be harassed for your
political beliefs, unconstitutionally.  Or you can stand up for your
right to travel anonymously, and be searched unconstitutionally.  Or
you can just not travel.  That's why I'm suing the government.

The government motion to dismiss my case is filed at:

   http://cryptome.org/gilmore-v-usa-fmd.pdf

The index to all the related documents is at:

   http://cryptome.org/freetotravel.htm

We will be filing our reply by the end of November.

    John Gilmore


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as interesting-people () lists elistx com
To unsubscribe or update your address, click
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/