Federal Judge Rules No-Fly List Process Is Unconstitutional

[Skeletor]

Federal Judge Rules No-Fly List Process Is Unconstitutional


http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/06/24/325216937/federal-judge-rules-no-fly-list-process-is-unconstitutional


A federal judge in Oregon says the process surrounding the federal government's "no-fly list" is unconstitutional.

Specifically, U.S. District Judge Anna Brown said the process doesn't give Americans on the list an effective way to challenge their inclusion.

...

In the opinion, Brown writes that being placed on the list has far-reaching implications. Flying internationally, she writes, is not a luxury, but a right. She concludes:

  "One need not look beyond the hardships suffered by Plaintiffs to understand the significance of the deprivation of the right to travel internationally. Due to the major burden imposed by inclusion on the No-Fly List, Plaintiffs have suffered significantly including long-term separation from spouses and children; the inability to access desired medical and prenatal care; the inability to pursue an education of their choosing; the inability to participate in important religious rites; loss of employment opportunities; loss of government entitlements; the inability to visit family; and the inability to attend important personal and family events such as graduations, weddings, and funerals. The Court concludes international travel is not a mere convenience or luxury in this modern world. Indeed, for many international travel is a necessary aspect of liberties sacred to members of a free society.
 "Accordingly, on this record the Court concludes Plaintiffs' inclusion on the No-Fly List constitutes a significant deprivation of their liberty interests in international travel."

[flipper5470]

Flying is not a right...

[avxo]

Flying is not a right...

The issue at hand in this decision isn't flying per se, but whether we are entitled to due process and, by extension, what process we are due in connection with the "No-Fly List". Judge Brown concluded that the process currently afforded is not sufficient, which isn't really that surprisingly, since there was basically no process at all, beyond "send a letter and maybe we'll do something."

Additionally, while the right to fly isn't a right explicitly enumerated in the Constitution the fact is that's not a requirement. This is made clear in Amendment IX which states, quite clearly, that "[t]he enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people" and Amendment X which states, also quite clearly, that "[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Also keep in mind that the right to travel is well-established in, inter alia, U.S. v. Wheeler (254 U.S. 281). The particular mode of transportation is irrelevant, in much the same way that the medium one uses to speak is irrelevant.