Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Tuesday October 27 2015, @05:58PM   Printer-friendly
from the what-comes-next-anal-probes dept.

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


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @11:43PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 27 2015, @11:43PM (#255340)

    Americans are stupid and easily distracted, not cowards.

    Americans are generally cowards, stupid, easily distracted, *and* anti-freedom. How many people are opposed to the drug war completely and not merely the ban on marijuana? How many people are completely opposed to mass surveillance? How many people are completely opposed to the government forcing you to surrender your constitutional liberties in exchange for being allowed to engage in some innocuous activity or privilege (TSA, DUI checkpoints)? Warrantless surveillance of any sort? Protest permits? Free speech zones? Unfettered border searches? Stop-and-frisk? If most people are opposed to all of those (as a start), then what you said would seem more legitimate.

    There are countless people who are so cowardly and worthless that they are willing to trade fundamental freedoms and a government that follows the highest law of the land for security.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1