Aviation securityJudge dismisses parts of lawsuit filed by partially naked man at airport
On Tuesday a federal judge dismissed most of the constitutional claims of a lawsuit filed by a man who was arrested at an airport after he stripped at a security checkpoint in protest of enhanced screening measures
On Tuesday a federal judge dismissed most of the constitutional claims of a lawsuit filed by man who was arrested at an airport after he stripped at a security checkpoint in protest of enhanced screening measures.
The man, twenty-one year old Aaron Tobey of Charlottesville, Virginia, filed a lawsuit against DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) head John Pistole, and the Capital Region Airport Commission on the grounds that he was falsely imprisoned and had his First and Fourth Amendment rights violated.
U.S. District Judge Henry E. Hudson threw out most of Tobey’s claims, but agreed to proceed with charges that his free-speech rights were violated.
On 30 December, Tobey was detained at a Richmond International Airport security checkpoint after he removed his shirt to display the Fourth Amendment which he had written on his chest. The move was in protest of TSA’s new screening measures which include full body scanners and enhanced pat downs. Tobey believed that these policies violated protections against unreasonable search and seizure.
Hudson dismissed the charges against Napolitano and Pistole as Tobey failed to provide any evidence that the two officials played any role in the events of 30 December. In addition the judge said Tobey failed to identify any Capital Region Airport Commission policy that condoned or fostered the alleged violations of Tobey’s free speech, equal protection and Fourth Amendment rights.
The judge also rejected the equal protection and search-and-seizure claims against the TSA screening officers who summoned police, but said it was premature to dismiss the free-speech claim. Hudson acknowledged that at this early point in the case he had to accept as true Tobey’s claims that he had complied with all of the security officers’ orders.
“The question, then, is whether the TSOs in fact radioed for assistance because of the message Plaintiff sought to convey, as opposed to Plaintiff’s admittedly bizarre behavior or because of some other reasonable restriction on First Amendment activity in the security screening area,” Hudson explained.
In response to the ruling, John W. Whitehead, the president of The Rutherford Institute, a Charlottesville civil liberties group, which is filing the lawsuit on Tobey’s behalf, maintained that Tobey’s first amendment rights had in fact been violated.
“Aaron Tobey was arrested for exercising his right to free speech, which is clearly protected under the First Amendment,” said Whitehead.
