<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>joshedwards.com &#187; unconstitutional</title>
	<atom:link href="http://joshedwards.com/tag/unconstitutional/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://joshedwards.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:15:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>TSA Screenings Illegal</title>
		<link>http://joshedwards.com/2010/11/29/tsa-screenings-illegal/</link>
		<comments>http://joshedwards.com/2010/11/29/tsa-screenings-illegal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:00:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[weblog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TSA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unconstitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Washington Post]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://joshedwards.com/?p=1458</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I haven&#8217;t talked much about my thoughts on the new Transportation Security Agency (TSA) screenings, but this Washington Post article pretty much sums it up: &#8220;Why the TSA pat-downs and ...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t talked much about my thoughts on the new Transportation Security Agency (TSA) screenings, but this Washington <em>Post</em> article pretty much sums it up: &#8220;<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/24/AR2010112404510.html">Why the TSA pat-downs and body scans are unconstitutional</a>.&#8221;</p>
<p>Key quote: </p>
<blockquote><p>In a 2006 opinion for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, then-Judge Samuel Alito stressed that screening procedures must be both &#8220;minimally intrusive&#8221; and &#8220;effective&#8221; &#8211; in other words, they must be &#8220;well-tailored to protect personal privacy,&#8221; and they must deliver on their promise of discovering serious threats. Alito upheld the practices at an airport checkpoint where passengers were first screened with walk-through magnetometers and then, if they set off an alarm, with hand-held wands. He wrote that airport searches are reasonable if they escalate &#8220;in invasiveness only after a lower level of screening disclose[s] a reason to conduct a more probing search.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>While technically not in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has found interstate travel to be &#8220;a right so elementary was conceived from the beginning to be a necessary concomitant of the stronger Union the Constitution created. In any event, freedom to travel throughout the United States has long been recognized as a basic right under the Constitution.&#8221; (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Guest">United States v. Guest (1966)</a></p>
<p>I can&#8217;t wait until someone tries this in court.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://joshedwards.com/2010/11/29/tsa-screenings-illegal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
