According to The Hill a lawsuit argued the agency failed to follow rulemaking procedures on the devices before deploying them.
A federal judge ordered the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) on Friday to quickly finalize a rulemaking procedure for the controversial full-body scanners it uses at airport security checkpoints across the country.
The agency was sued by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) over the controversial devices in a lawsuit that argued that the TSA did not follow federal procedure for rulemaking when it decided to deploy the scanners, which are known as Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) devices.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on Friday, ordering the TSA to "submit to the court a schedule for the expeditious issuance of a final rule" on the full-body scanners within 30 days.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @10:34PM
How? What "sane and effective" security do you have in mind that doesn't violate the constitution? Because we can't have government thugs searching people.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Tuesday October 27 2015, @10:55PM
A locked cockpit door
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @11:28PM
Well, we have that, but does it necessarily relate to the TSA? I'm just wondering where this New TSA comes in.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 28 2015, @10:11AM
Germanwings Flight 9525
(The result of which was not outlawing locked doors, but stricter rules for pilots' mental health checks, AND a requirement that there always be two crew members in the cockpit - which in the case a pilot needs to use the bath room will result in someone who is not a pilot - and thus don't get their mental health checked at all - sitting in the pilots seat).
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Wednesday October 28 2015, @05:05PM
What happens if there's two pilots in the cockpit, and one of them knocks the other one out? The usual over-reaction.
Helios Flight 522 was more concerning. Both of these events were victims of the reaction after 9/11. Now locking the cockpit door prevents 9/11 style events, but instead causes 9525/522 events. It's a toss up as to which is a better policy.
So how does the TSA stop this?
Groping 13 year old girls does not prevent 9/11 or 9525/522.
(Score: 2) by Dale on Wednesday October 28 2015, @04:37PM
I never had issues with the metal detectors and scanning of bags like they used to do. I don't really have issues with the "don't bring a gun on the plane" bit and other normal stuff we had prior. I remember as a child my dad having to measure his pocket knife to make sure the blade was under 3,4,5 inches (no idea what the rule was) and that was the extent of things. Shaving cream is not a threat to the plane or anyone on it. Fingernail clippers are not either. A bottle of water or soda having to be tossed is just idiotic. I don't really care if the airlines run it or some successor agency to TSA. It isn't like passengers are going to let things stand like was common practice prior to 9/11. The fact that we would save billions of dollars by being rational is an obvious bonus.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Wednesday October 28 2015, @05:01PM
A bottle of water or soda having to be tossed is just idiotic
Not to the companies selling water and soda after the security checkpoint.
Of course "tossing" bombs is a very dangerous place. Next time you go through a checkpoint and see someone's water bottle tossed, run like hell. It's a bomb (which is why they confiscated it), and they haven't called bomb disposal in.