Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My only comment is that if anyone did that to us (groping) in the "outside" world, we'd be able to file sexual assault charges.
Not if you consented to it. And you are consenting to it when you pass through the security area. You have the perfect right to choose not to pass through security and just leave the airport.
I am not just "thinking" about it, I am specifically referring to it and it supercedes the "supremacy clause" in those areas where the powers delegated to the federal government are not clearly delegated to them by the soveriengn states.
You're thinking of it incorrectly. This is a federal agency in a federal zone. It's completely and totally a federal issue. The 10th Amendment only applies where there is nothing in the Constitution about who gets what power. There is no debate on this, except apparently in your mind. This is completely and utterly a federal issue.
Also, your reading of the Supremacy Clause and the 10th Amendment are wildly inaccurate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Going by your logic, then there is literally NO area where the states retain any soverignty at all. I don't buy that. BTW -- the Confederate States of America also had a "supremacy clause", so that fact alone has to have significance in that it referred to that federal law trumps state law ONLY in those areas where the feds have specified and delegated powers.
You don't understand, apparently, the argument being made. First, this is absolutely an area where federal law governs. This wouldn't even make it to a trial. Second, the federal government has clearly enumerated powers, one of which is the safety and security of the United States. That is a federal issue, not a state issue. It is granted by the Constitution. Therefore, the Supremacy Clause is the operating law.
Even if such a power were not granted, it would fall under federal power by the Commerce Clause. And then the Supremacy Clause would govern. And so on.
In short, there is no valid argument whatsoever that this is, in any possible way, not a federal matter.
And I have no idea what in the hell the CSA has to do with anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Does federal law permit sexual harrassment/assault? If it does, then ok, you might have a "case" (pun intended! LOL), but if it does not,then state laws forbidding such are a grounds upon which to challenge the feds and the supremacy clause as to just how far it goes.
I say let's at least take it to the next level and see what the courts say...
You really don't understand how the law works, do you? It's your OPINION that it is sexual harassment. Putting aside implied consent, the TSA has mandated (under their federal authority, which 100% trumps state authority) specific methods of searching. It does not matter at all, in any way, any shape, or any form, what Texas thinks of it. It doesn't matter what you think of it. There isn't even any ambiguity here. This is nothing but pandering and chest-thumping by Texas, with no grounds at all.
If this were to go to court, as you so badly want it to, it would last as long in court as it takes the US Attorney assigned to the case to draft a MSJ and have the case thrown out.
Not if you consented to it. And you are consenting to it when you pass through the security area. You have the perfect right to choose not to pass through security and just leave the airport.
And Texas law protects its citizens against sexual harrasment and assault. You are NOT on federal property in, say, the DFW airport. The TSA agents are employees of the federal goverment, true, but the grounds proper are still on state soil.
But ok, whatever, far as that goes, I say let' force the feds into a confrontation if necessary. Lets take it to a higher court.
Let me put it this way. What if, say, I am on an airline flight with my daughter, and some guy in security decides to grope her and feel her up just because:
1. His petty bureaucratic power gives him the right to do so because he turns her own.
2. She has done nothing whatsoever to give any one any reason to suspect her of being a terrorist, other than political correctness demands that blond haired young women be treated the same as plug-ugly Arab men with a one way ticket to Iran.
If something like this had happened any where in Texas, I would have spent the night in jail for assault on my own part to anyone who groped my daughter/fiance/mother/sister/etc.
Or, better way to handle it, would be to call the Texas state authorities and have the guy arrested for sexual assault.
Does being a federal employee exempt someone from having to be subject to laws of the Fourth Ammendment? That is, to have to back up your actions in a court of law, if necessary?
And Texas law protects its citizens against sexual harrasment and assault. You are NOT on federal property in, say, the DFW airport. The TSA agents are employees of the federal goverment, true, but the grounds proper are still on state soil.
Wrong. It's a federal zone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
But ok, whatever, far as that goes, I say let' force the feds into a confrontation if necessary. Lets take it to a higher court.
No "higher court" would even hear the case. It wouldn't make it 5 minutes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Let me put it this way. What if, say, I am on an airline flight with my daughter, and some guy in security decides to grope her and feel her up just because:
1. His petty bureaucratic power gives him the right to do so because he turns her own.
2. She has done nothing whatsoever to give any one any reason to suspect her of being a terrorist, other than political correctness demands that blond haired young women be treated the same as plug-ugly Arab men with a one way ticket to Iran.
If something like this had happened any where in Texas, I would have spent the night in jail for assault on my own part to anyone who groped my daughter/fiance/mother/sister/etc.
Then you have the right to file a complaint against the guy and go after him that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Or, better way to handle it, would be to call the Texas state authorities and have the guy arrested for sexual assault.
You can't. Until you prove otherwise, he was acting within the scope of his authority. No one made you go through the security line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasReb
Does being a federal employee exempt someone from having to be subject to laws of the Fourth Ammendment? That is, to have to back up your actions in a court of law, if necessary?
Fourth Amendment doesn't apply. You're consenting to search by going through the line.
Sometime you remind me of a robot, GMOH. Like something programed that just repeats "the law" without any real human being behind it.
Like Orwell in "1984"...Duckspeak...as it is.
What part of it do you not understand of lets LET it go to a federal court and see what they say?
You seem to have some sort of blind commitment to the "supremacy clause" that absolutely prevents you from seeing anything else but.
I don't want to intentionally insult you or anything, but what the hell are your credentials for being the alpha and omega on Constitutional Law? Will you please share those? You can be just about as arrogant as anyone I have ever seen (even though, on some points, I might agree with you) and for no reasons other than an inflated sense of yourself, it seems.
But ok, if it is a pi$$ing contest you want to get into, you found the right feller to do it with, my friend!
Quote:
Originally Posted by getmeoutofhere
You're thinking of it incorrectly. This is a federal agency in a federal zone. It's completely and totally a federal issue. The 10th Amendment only applies where there is nothing in the Constitution about who gets what power. There is no debate on this, except apparently in your mind. This is completely and utterly a federal issue.
*shrug* Then everything is a federal issue, right? Why not just repeal the 10th Ammendment?
Quote:
Also, your reading of the Supremacy Clause and the 10th Amendment are wildly inaccurate.
No, they are wildly accurate and you don't like it. That's why you are going off like a wild elephant takes a dump...all over the place.
Quote:
You don't understand, apparently, the argument being made.
I understand absolutely the argument being made. Apparently though, you don't understand it makes no sense other than, perhaps, fear on your part.
[QUOTE} First, this is absolutely an area where federal law governs. This wouldn't even make it to a trial. Second, the federal government has clearly enumerated powers, one of which is the safety and security of the United States. That is a federal issue, not a state issue. It is granted by the Constitution. Therefore, the Supremacy Clause is the operating law.
Even if such a power were not granted, it would fall under federal power by the Commerce Clause. And then the Supremacy Clause would govern. And so on.
In short, there is no valid argument whatsoever that this is, in any possible way, not a federal matter. [/quote]
*whew* What a rant. Well, then let's take it to court and see, ok? Do you honestly not think the argument you are making is nothing more than a broken record? You are simply roting some stare-decisis cases, and are trying to pass them off as intelligent discusion of constutional law.
Are you that dammed blind as to think that just because a court might rule a certain way based on what has been ruled in the past, that it has absolute authority forever and always?
[quote] And I have no idea what in the hell the CSA has to do with anything.[/QUOTE[
I am not surprised you don't. But listen closely, and I will explain, ok? The CSA Constitution ALSO contained a "supremacy clause". No then, don't you sorta see where that takes things in terms of just where and when and why the supremacy clause and the 10th ammendment would be applicable and under just what circumtances they might be?
Quote:
You really don't understand how the law works, do you? It's your OPINION that it is sexual harassment. Putting aside implied consent, the TSA has mandated (under their federal authority, which 100% trumps state authority) specific methods of searching. It does not matter at all, in any way, any shape, or any form, what Texas thinks of it. It doesn't matter what you think of it. There isn't even any ambiguity here. This is nothing but pandering and chest-thumping by Texas, with no grounds at all.
Well, please forgive me if I am not particularly impressed by a used car saleman from DFW and hates Texas anyway, as in giving me a lesson in constitutional law. LMAO You are so full of yourself as to be a parody of the same.
Quote:
If this were to go to court, as you so badly want it to, it would last as long in court as it takes the US Attorney assigned to the case to draft a MSJ and have the case thrown out.
Then lets see, shall we? Why are you scared of it? Hell, far as that goes, why are you even still here in Texas?
=getmeoutofhere;19408930]Wrong. It's a federal zone.
No, it isn't. But ok, maybe it is. Lets take it to court and see.
Quote:
No "higher court" would even hear the case. It wouldn't make it 5 minutes.
Yes, they would. Because it would be a challenge to the "supremacy clause", so to speak. A higher court would almost have to hear it.
Quote:
Then you have the right to file a complaint against the guy and go after him that way.
Two things can be done at once. Yes, file a civil complaint as well. And, uhhhh, if there are grounds to file a civil complaint, then it sorta stands to reason that there may be criminal charges applicable?
Quote:
You can't. Until you prove otherwise, he was acting within the scope of his authority. No one made you go through the security line.
This is a very scary line of thinking. No one "makes" someone go to the county courthouse either...but the deputy sheriff who secures the line after going thru the metal detector gate does not permit him to feel you off. He still subject to Texas State Law. And may have to justify his actions in a court of law if there was no reasonable cause to grope you other than he just thought it might be fun.
Now then, all I am saying -- all most are saying -- is that federal agents should be subject to the same standards of reasonable suspicion and professional behavior. And if necessary? Then lets take it to a higher court and let the chips fall where they may. You can quote the supremacy clause and precedent all the live-long day. I am saying sometimes the federal law is a dammed ass and it is high time it is confronted.
Quote:
Fourth Amendment doesn't apply. You're consenting to search by going through the line.
So now free American citizens surrender their Fourth Ammendment rights to board an airplane???? And are subjected -- potentially -- to the free hands of petty authorities who just want to prove their power to do so? Gawdamighty, man, what world do you live in?
How pathetic a line of reasoning. If our Founding Fathers thought like you, we would still be subjects of a tyranny. Truly, truly, sad.
I love how you throw what you think is legal-sounding language and expect people to be impressed. You have no idea what you're talking about, legally. The reason I sound like a robot is because there is absolutely no ambiguity at all. You can take it to court and the case will be tossed immediately. It's that clear-cut.
1) Again, the CSA? So what? That has no bearing at all that the CSA copied part of the US Constitution. Any excuse to jam the Confederacy into any conversation, I guess.
2) It's laughable how badly you are misreading the 10th Amendment and Supremacy Clause (which I keep going back to because, well, it's the governing law). It's such a bad misreading that I'm not even sure what you are trying to say. But for the simple crowd, the 10th Amendment says that where the Constitution is silent on who gets what power, it typically goes to the states unless otherwise prohibited. The Supremacy Clause says that, in areas where state and federal law are in opposition and the federal government has power in that area, the Feds win. This is absolutely, 100% an area where the Feds are granted the power to regulate and enforce. Therefore, federal power is supreme over state power. There is no 10th Amendment argument here. The responsibility for securing the safety of the USA is expressly granted to the federal government. Texas has nothing to do with it.
3) I do so love how people, especially you, seem to bring up my dislike for Texas and question why I am still here as if it is some magical amulet that makes me wrong. It's totally irrelevant to anything being discussed, and the way you keep bringing it up is edging close to a personal attack. No matter where I am posting from, it would not change your incorrect reading of the law.
4) Stare decisis is the way our courts function. This is not a social issue. This is a basic and fundamental point of law that hasn't changed in almost 200 years. It's not going to change now.
Last edited by getmeoutofhere; 06-01-2011 at 10:54 PM..
No, it isn't. But ok, maybe it is. Lets take it to court and see.
Yes, they would. Because it would be a challenge to the "supremacy clause", so to speak. A higher court would almost have to hear it.
Two things can be done at once. Yes, file a civil complaint as well. And, uhhhh, if there are grounds to file a civil complaint, then it sorta stands to reason that there may be criminal charges applicable?
This is a very scary line of thinking. No one "makes" someone go to the county courthouse either...but the deputy sheriff who secures the line after going thru the metal detector gate does not permit him to feel you off. He still subject to Texas State Law. And may have to justify his actions in a court of law if there was no reasonable cause to grope you other than he just thought it might be fun.
Now then, all I am saying -- all most are saying -- is that federal agents should be subject to the same standards of reasonable suspicion and professional behavior. And if necessary? Then lets take it to a higher court and let the chips fall where they may. You can quote the supremacy clause and precedent all the live-long day. I am saying sometimes the federal law is a dammed ass and it is high time it is confronted.
So now free American citizens surrender their Fourth Ammendment rights to board an airplane???? And are subjected -- potentially -- to the free hands of petty authorities who just want to prove their power to do so? Gawdamighty, man, what world do you live in?
How pathetic a line of reasoning. If our Founding Fathers thought like you, we would still be subjects of a tyranny. Truly, truly, sad.
1) You keep saying "take it to court" like it would get a big trial. It wouldn't. It would take 5 minutes to get it thrown out. A higher court wouldn't hear anything beyond the USAO's presentation of the Constitution and the Supremacy Clause. After that, the case would be tossed.
2) Civil complaints are not equal to criminal complaints. Only the DA can bring criminal charges.
3) Actually, the sheriff searching you is free to search you any way he likes. If you feel he has done it inappropriately, then you file a complaint and if he can't justify the search, his bosses will take disciplinary action. Exactly the same as a TSA agent.
4) By going into the airport and passing through security, you're waiving your Fourth Amendment protection. Going to the airport and flying is voluntary.
You are making a fool out of yourself GMHO. Even more than you are still being in Texas and announcing to the whole world and the State of Texas every single day with your "status" how much you hate it.
I cannot even believe you take this position. If it did not involve a constitutional question, then why the living hell did the DOJ get involved in it?
Your position doesn't make any damn sense other than that you are, apparently, too arrogant and full of yourself to admit you are wrong on this.
Which side would win? I don't know. But there IS a federal issue involved and if Texas stands with its guns, it WILL go to a higher court, and perhaps even to the SCOTUS. Not sure, but if it doesnt, it wont be because there is not a fed/state issue at stake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by getmeoutofhere
1) You keep saying "take it to court" like it would get a big trial. It wouldn't. It would take 5 minutes to get it thrown out. A higher court wouldn't hear anything beyond the USAO's presentation of the Constitution and the Supremacy Clause. After that, the case would be tossed.
Lets see.
Quote:
2) Civil complaints are not equal to criminal complaints. Only the DA can bring criminal charges.
Uhhhh...what the hell are you talking about? Will you go back and read? I said there is no reason that both charges cannot be brought.
Quote:
3) Actually, the sheriff searching you is free to search you any way he likes. If you feel he has done it inappropriately, then you file a complaint and if he can't justify the search, his bosses will take disciplinary action. Exactly the same as a TSA agent.
Yep, one can file a complaint Both civil and criminal. And the person may have to justify his actions in a court of law. Both civil and criminal. This bill under Texas law will just do the same. And Texas should persue it, and back it up.
Quote:
4) By going into the airport and passing through security, you're waiving your Fourth Amendment protection. Going to the airport and flying is voluntary.
So is going into a courthouse. So is going down to the local supermarket, voluntary. Tell me something, will you? Where -- in your opinion -- DOES the Fourth Ammendment apply? Or the Tenth Ammendment? Or where is there a limitation on the Supremacy Clause, in your mindset?
As it is, I am not going to go on with this any more tonite...because I confess people like you -no concept of freedom at all -- make me want to just flat out....barf.....
G'night y'all...
Last edited by TexasReb; 06-02-2011 at 12:01 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
