Administrative Issues Journal Volume 2 Issue 3 CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS: Article 16 OCTOBER 4th-5th, 2012

10-2012 Legal and Managerial Issues in Airport Scanning Joan Hubbard

Follow this and additional works at: https://dc.swosu.edu/aij Part of the Health and Medical Administration Commons, Higher Education Administration Commons, and the Public Administration Commons

Recommended Citation Hubbard, Joan (2012) "Legal and Managerial Issues in Airport Scanning," Administrative Issues Journal: Vol. 2 : Iss. 3 , Article 16. Available at: https://dc.swosu.edu/aij/vol2/iss3/16

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at SWOSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Administrative Issues Journal by an authorized editor of SWOSU Digital Commons. An ADA compliant document is available upon request. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES JOURNAL: EDUCATION, PRACTICE, AND RESEARCH 44 plane ticker or appearing onagovernmentplane tickeror appearing watch list. passenger’s clothingorshoeswere suspicious, orifthepassengerraised ared flag by, for example, buyingaone-way fied by a computer screening iftheydecided that screeners a system. inspection Security could also require further searches. pat-down ary The additional scrutiny was required ifanindividual triggered amagnetometer orwas identi eters. baggageandmandating that passengersbescannedby walk-throughadditional screening magnetom ofcarry-on explosives to detect onpassengers.checkpoints The government initiallyreacted to theterrorist attacks by requiring ed States recommended that The TSA andtheCongress attention give to priority improving ofscreening theability letter, exhibition inEPICvNapolitano.) that would jeopardize damages. (Kerner, humanlives andcausemillionofdollarsinproperty 2010,p. 7of isinthepublicinterest becauseitcouldners, prevent asadvanced alsoknown imaging of technology (AIT), acts found to undertheFourth bepermissible Amendment.” argued Kerner that thedepartment’s useoffull-bodyscan a special public need beyondthe search law serves enforcement and is conducted in a reasonable fashion, it will be screening “requires nowarrant andnosuspicionofwrongdoing,” acompelling publicinterest. ifitserves “As longas persereasonable.” screening searches may asvirtually where viewpassengerairport courts (Kornblatt, 2007,p. 396.) boarding gatesconcept asanalogous to ournation’s ofairport boarders, hascreated asituation intheUnited States cost damagefrom that mustpay Americans terrorist to attacks. prevent andproperty death, injury issue, butuponprobable cause.” screening have isareasonable Butthusfarthecourts ruledthat passengerairport houses, papers, andeffects, againstunreasonable searches andseizures, shallnotbeviolated, andno Warrants shall the nation’s majorairports. The U.S. Constitution states that the “rights ofthepeopleto besecure intheirpersons, A Keywords: security, , screening, Constitution, Congress transportation, ofHomelandSecurity’s scanners useoffull-body partment to screen passengersatthenation’s majorairports. government screening technology. isinvestigating generation thenext ofairport The privacy debate centers ontheDe explosivesdetect oftheTSA’s onpassengers. thelegality As scanner full-body program continues to debated, be thefederal recommended andtheCongress thatThe TSA attention give to to improving ofscreening priority checkpoints theability 11 terroristAfter the September attacks on the U.S., the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks the United Upon States Scanning Legal IssuesinAirport andManagerial University of North University ofNorth Texas Dr. JoanHubbard By 2004,the By TSA estimated that roughly 15percent passengerswere of domesticairline to second alsosubject After theSeptember 11terrorist attacks ontheU.S., theNational Commission on Terrorist Attacks UpontheUnit Francine J. Kerner, chiefcounsel oftheDHS’ Transportation security Administration Security insiststhat airport amount ofdangerposedto thepublicby apersonwhoseeksto blow upanairplane,“The coupled withthe debate ofHomelandSecurity’s centers useoffull-bodyscannersto ontheDepartment screen passengersat ligation to guard thenation from terrorist attacks andthepublic’s constitutional rightto privacy. The privacy merica’s Fourth Amendment rightsare beingcalledinto questionasthefederal government balances itsob ------ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES JOURNAL: EDUCATION, PRACTICE, AND RESEARCH 45 ------

Legal experts disagree on the government’s authority to use full-body scanners. The courts tend to give great great courts give The to tend authority use full-body scanners. to experts on the government’s Legal disagree According to passenger complaints filed with TSA and obtained by EPIC, airportby EPIC, TSA and obtained been negli personnel have filed with passenger complaints to According The government’s assurances continue to be questioned by privacy, consumer rights, and civil rights organiza rights, consumer privacy, be questioned by to continue assurances government’s The TSA officials insist that the government will protect the will privacygovernment of passengers inspected the officials insist that with the whole-bodyTSA Homeland Security use of whole-body secretary expand plans to announced in July 2010 The government shifted its attention to whole-body to shifted in its attention incident after scanners 2009 terrorism government a Christmas Day The

reveal a great deal of innocent but embarrassing information and are remarkably ineffective at revealing low-densityrevealing at remarkably are ineffective and information embarrassing but innocent of deal great a reveal 6 of printout) 2010, p. Post, Washington (Rosen in the contraband.” should be considered ‘routine,’ and therefore courts should rule that neither can be used for primary screening...They primarycourts be used for neither can should rule that screening...They and therefore ‘routine,’ considered should be is, some cause to suspect a particular traveler of wrongdoing. Neither virtual suspect some cause to pat-downs strip-searches a particular of wrongdoing. is, nor intrusive traveler case, there’s strong argument that the TSA’s measures violate the Fourth Amendment,” argued According to Rosen, to According argued Amendment,” the Fourth violate measures TSA’s the that argument strong there’s case, suspicion -- that some individualized such as strip-searches require or body-cavity searches, searches, “’non-routine’ ington University and author of “The Naked Crowd: Reclaiming Security and Freedom in an Anxious Age.” “But in this in “But Age.” Anxious an in “TheReclaiming Security Freedom and Crowd: Naked of author and University ington Wash at George professor Rosen, law Jeffrey noted security, about national concerns the government’s to deference with FBS devices.” icy, the TSA does not offer air travelers a meaningful alternative to [full-body scanner] searches in airports in searches to [full-body scanner] equipped a meaningful alternative air travelers offer does not TSA the icy, gent about explaining alternative screening procedures and in some cases have mandated that passengers undergo passengers undergo that mandated cases have and in some procedures screening alternative about explaining gent practice and pol of pattern, a matter “as whole-body that In DHS, the privacy argued to its petition group screening.

the government doesn’t have a right to peer beneath your clothes without probable cause.” (Greenberg, 2010, p. 5.) 2010, p. (Greenberg, cause.” clothes without probable your peer beneath a right to have doesn’t the government tions that contend that the full-body scanners produce detailed images that are the equivalent to a “digital strip- “digital a to the equivalent are detailed images that the full-body scanners produce that contend tions that “[w]ithout a warrant, that argues of Electronic Center, director Privacy Information executive Rotenberg, Marc search.”

Kair, 2011, p. 3, 4.) 2011, p. Kair, which would include a physical pat-down. TSA officials say that “more than 98 percent of individuals selected for AIT for selected of individuals 98 percent than “more that say officials TSA pat-down. physical include a would which (Kane; down.” methods such as a pat other screening over technology this by be screened to opted have screening regulators also note that the scans are optional and passengers may request an alternative method of inspection, an alternative request optional and passengers may the scans are that also note regulators screening protocols “ensure that such screening does not unreasonably intrude on a passenger’s privacy in the air on a passenger’s intrude does not unreasonably such screening that “ensure protocols screening DHS addressed.” adequately are AIT screening to privacy related concerns public’s the and that port environment screened. A facial blur has also been applied to both the millimeter wave and backscatter technologies.” The agency’s agency’s The technologies.” and backscatter wave both the millimeter A facial blur has also been applied to screened. not come into contact with the passengers being screened. In testimony before Congress, government regulators regulators government Congress, before In testimony contact with the passengers being screened. into not come of the person permit recognition quality would images that photographic do not produce machines “AIT said that ther enhance privacy, regulators say that the staff viewing the images are being stationed in remote locations and will locations remote in being stationed the staff viewing the images are that say regulators privacy, ther enhance fur To stored. they are once permanently deleting the images and by appearance blurringscanners by each person’s document.) and set a goal of deploying nearly 1,300 AIT machines by the end of 2012. (Kane; Kair, March 2011, p. 2--this is a new 2--this 2011, p. March the end of 2012. (Kane; nearly by 1,300 AIT machines and set a goal of deploying Kair, tion, the advanced-technology body scanners will eventually be used as the “primary screening” method at airport method at “primary screening” be used as the body scanners will eventually tion, the advanced-technology airports, U.S. units at technology 500 imaging had deployed government 2011, the federal of March checkpoints. As conceal under layers of clothing and sneak on board airplanes. According to the Transportation Security Administra Transportation the to According airplanes. of clothing and sneak on board under layers conceal AIT scanners at U.S. airports. Those scanners use low-level x-rays to create anatomically detailed pictures of each anatomically create to x-rays scanners use low-level Those airports. U.S. AIT scanners at might individuals that explosives to weapons and machines can detect try say the officials DHS body. passenger’s

signed to do,” Obama said. Obama said. do,” to signed the aftermath, President Obama vowed to strengthen and screening measures. “In the never-ending airport strengthen to security measures. and screening Obama vowed the aftermath, President de are these steps what That’s ahead of a nimble adversary. step one stay to have we our country, protect to race which a Nigerian man flying into Detroit allegedly tried to detonate an explosive device hidden in his underwear. In hidden in his underwear. device explosive an detonate to tried allegedly which a Nigerian Detroit flying into man

to even more intimate and sensitive parts of the body, such as under and in-between a woman’s breasts. (Mock, 2009, breasts. a woman’s as under and in-between such parts and sensitive of the body, intimate more even to 4.) p. thighs. Furthermore, screening officers conducting the search may under certain circumstances , expand the scope certain the expand may under , conducting officers circumstances the search screening Furthermore, thighs. ten described as overly invasive and draw significant complaints from the traveling public. While the searches are are While the searches public. the traveling from complaints significant and draw invasive described overly as ten the chest and including parts contactwith sensitive conducted a same-sex on the body, of pat-downs require basis, points, including modifications to the pat-down search protocols. Present day pat-down search procedures are of are procedures pat-down search day Present protocols. to the pat-down search modifications including points, “Since 2001, the TSA has implemented stricter and more extensive secondary search procedures at airport at secondarystricter extensive check procedures implemented has and more search TSA the 2001, “Since ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES JOURNAL: EDUCATION, PRACTICE, AND RESEARCH 46 the scientists concluded that “it appearsthat real independent safety data donotexist.” individuals withagreater to susceptibility cancer. Calling for athorough review ofthepotential healthimpacts, has beenunderestimated inchildren, andcould oldertravelers, causehealthimpacts pregnant women, and science advisorJohnHoldren, four University ofCalifornia scientists warnedthat radiation from thescanners that undergo personnel whowork screening nearthescanners.letter anApril to andfor In airport White House Day 2009. explosives to passengertried detonate that police allegetheNigerian onajetboundfor Detroit onChristmas 2010 follow-up GAO report, saidit “remains unclear” whethertheadvanced scannerswould have the detected machines withoutfullyassessingwhethertheycould detect “threat items” concealed onthebody. aMarch In ogy. saidthat thegovernment the 2009report, agency anOctober In TSA was deploying thebodyscanning March 2011,p.9--new report) cording to Fred H.Cate, alaw professor University’s at Indiana Center for Applied Cybersecurity Research. (Cate, with interfering are actually TSA agents’ to dosoby ability sendingthemonsomany wildgoodchases,” ac images. AITs“The are infrastructure notmerelyagainstthreats, to failinginpractice protect theairtransport but ger’s nakedbodies. The scannershave countries. beenbannedinsomeMuslim religious groups tenets andotherspiritual ofMuslims by allow thegovernment to capture photos ofpassen government demonstrates acompelling interest. The groups’ petitioncontends that thescannersviolation the Act, whichbarsthegovernment from placingasubstantial burden onaperson’s exercise ofreligion unlessthe document). and dishonored at thehandsoftheirown government inthenameof ‘safety’ policies.” (Cissna, March 2011,new trauma from thegroping ofstrangers. tragic Most ofthesepoliciesare thesilent massesthat are traumatized source lastthingamolested ofradiation)person could dealwithbecauseitwould is thevery result inyet more been abused. Logic suggeststhat therecent introduction ofthefullbodyscan(itselfapotentially harmful intra andinterstate ofourvast land. We alsosadlyrank firstinthenation for bothmenand women whohave both meansoftransportation, dependsonairflight asamandatory state ofAlaska wonderful cal touch. My fought anditisthispopulation for that are by therightsofabusesurvivors themostharmed unwanted physi between meandthosesurrounding me.” she saidcould have been andthedifference intimidating becauseoftheirpositionsauthority “very inheight sna refused theadditionalscreening, shewas surrounded by police, employees,TSA officialsandairport which me andtheforce-forgotten oftheprevious intensive memory physical search returned,” Cissna said. When Cis anomaly. “The TSA agent beganto tell mewhat would soonhappenregarding where shewas goingto touch whensherefused to undergostopped atafull-bodyscan,whichwould anairport have disclosedherphysical in testimony State by Rep. Alaska Sharon Cissna, whohadamastectomy dueto breast cancer. Cissna was by sendingthemonsomany wildgoodchases.” (Cate, March 2011,p.9--new report) infrastructure againstthreats, with theairtransport interfering tect butare actually TSA agents’ to doso ability ofanomaliesthat somany the scannersdetect falsereports AITs“the are notmerely to failinginpractice pro Some medical experts warn that the whole-body scannerscould present safety warnthat concerns thewhole-body for medicalexperts passengers Some The U.S. Government Accountability also raisedquestionsaboutthe valueofthescanning Office technol ahighlevel offalse scannersreport say addition,critics that theairport In “anomalies” inthepassengers’ The publicinterest groupsscannersalsoviolate theReligious Freedom argue that theairport Restoration Cissna provided apassionate ofthegovernment’s critique system. security “For years I’ve fifty nearly The personaltrauma offacingthe TSA’s screening process was airport related to Congress inMarch 2011 Fred H.Cate, alaw professor University’s at Indiana Center for Applied Cybersecurity Research, states that ------ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES JOURNAL: EDUCATION, PRACTICE, AND RESEARCH 47 ------Congress has begun weighing in on the debate over full-body scanners. In Bob 2010, Senators Bennett, full-body scanners. R-Utah, over in on the debate has begun weighing Congress EPIC has filed a series of Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits seeking data on the scanners’ ability seekingAct on the scanners’ requests and lawsuits data of Freedom Information EPIC has filed a series of TSA officials responded that “Given the nature of the AIT program, petitioners face no likelihood of irreparable no likelihood of irreparable face petitioners program, of the AIT nature the “Given that responded officials TSA In July 2010, EPIC also filed a lawsuit challenging the TSA’s decision to make body scanners the primary decision screen TSA’s the challenging Inalso filed a lawsuit July 2010, EPIC However, Homeland Security officials say that the x-ray imaging technology is safe and estimated that the radia the that estimated and safe is technology imaging x-ray SecurityHomeland the that say officials However, use whole-body plans to has been the subject scanners In of a series April of legal challenges. government’s The David J. Brenner, director of the Center for Radiological Research, agreed that the scan the that agreed Radiological Research, for Center University of the Columbia director Brenner, J. David makers’ bill would require all commercial airports in the United States to deploy body imaging scanners by 2013. by scanners body imaging airports deploy to all commercial States in the United require bill would makers’ also admitted to saving over 2,000 photos from airport from 2,000 photos body scanners taken during training. over saving to also admitted law The supporting D-Minn., legislation full-body scanners. install to plans the DHS introduced Klobuchar, and Amy scanners be able to store and transmit images. Government officials say those functionsare shut off when the de officials Government images. and transmit store scanners be able to Marshals Service it saved that U.S. has conceded airports. Department’s installed at the Justice are Nonetheless, vices Homeland SecurityThe Department courthouse. has federal Florida a 35,000 images taken with similar machines at images the that insisted had agencies federal The take. machines the that images body scanned transmit and store to that require specifications technical TSA’s experts. TSA the But by viewed were as they soon as discarded be would and privacy-protecting features creates a significant risk of irreparable harm to members of the flying public, and public, flying the of members to harm irreparable risk of a significant creates privacy-protectingand features assertions transportationtheir anecdotal this essential .shutting down security furnish no basis for program.” from potentially catastrophic events. The opt-out provision and the operating protocols requiring immediate dele immediate requiring protocols and the operating opt-outThe provision events. catastrophic potentially from on the part concerns sensitivity potential to the AIT program’s their misuse highlight tion of images and preventing with these privacy-respecting agency that of a system not shown implementation have of passengers ... Petitioners modesty autonomy and personal privacy, respect regarding individual sensibilities to is designed program The harm. while still performing maximum extent possible, the to its crucial function all members of the public of protecting Privacy Act, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the Fourth Amendment. Amendment. Act and the Fourth Restoration Freedom the Religious Act, Prevention Voyeurism Video Privacy the Act, 10-1157) No. the Department Case of Homeland Security, (EPIC v. statutory and constitutional rights of air travelers.” Joining EPIC in the suit are three frequent air travelers: the Council the Council air travelers: frequent three Joining EPIC in the suit are statutory rights of air travelers.” and constitutional Al-Khalili, and security Nadhira human rights activist legal counsel expert Chip Pitts on American-Islamic Relations’ the Act, Procedure the Administrative violates program the government claim that petitioners The Schneier. Bruce airports, re and asking pending independent in U.S. ing technique the court scanner program, suspend the body- to the for disregard acted has regulatoryof its outside TSA authority profound and with “the that charges suit That view. for example, airport security personnel are prohibited from scanning children due to warnings that the machines warnings that due to airport scanning children example, from for security prohibited personnel are body scanners raise also warning that is Commission European The laws. national violate may measures. less intrusive privacy fundamental and recommending concerns 2010, the Electronic Privacy Information Center and 33 other public interest groups petitioned the TSA to suspend to TSA petitioned the groups other public interest and 33 2010, the Electronic Center Privacy Information subjectsit because unreasonable an unconstitutional is to passengers screening the that arguing program, scan the In Britain, in other countries. been raised have Similar concerns of privacy. invasion an unlawful to and amount search flying on an airplane or from naturally occurring background radiation levels. radiation occurring background naturally flying on an airplane or from number is quite uncertain.” (Brenner, March 2011, p. 2--new document.) 2011, p. March (Brenner, uncertain.” number is quite passengers get while that machines is less than the level the advanced-imaging from receives tion dosage individuals risks from the associated radiation exposure. Given the very large numbers of scans involved, potentially up to one to up potentially very the of scans involved, numbers Given large exposure. radiation associated the risks from willbe some there amongst the scanned population, likelihood that, is a significant there in the U.S., billion each year though this per year, 100 cancers is around A best estimate exposure. radiation the associated by produced cancers a primary become scans have backscatter “In x-ray that cancer. of the incidence of increasing the potential ners have cancer very very to will likely be exposed of people numbers small radiation-associated large measure, screening ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES JOURNAL: EDUCATION, PRACTICE, AND RESEARCH 48 requires afull-bodypat down.” Kair, (Kane; 2011,p. 4). such anomalieswillbelimited to theareas ofthebodydisplaying unlessthenumberofanomaliesdetected analarm instead highlighting theareas outlineofaperson.Pat-downs anomalyonageneric withadetected usedto resolve Regulators say thatairports. thesoftware “enhances by eliminating passenger-specific imagesand passengerprivacy images. TSA isbeginning to fieldknowntest that asautomatic equipment, target recognition, at somedomestic infavordeveloping designed gender-neutral software toofcartoon-like, blocktheviewofpassengerbodyparts screening technology.vestigating generation ofairport thenext The companies that maketheexisting scannersare public didnotbelieve thatto thescanners poseahealthrisk peoplewhogothrough them. percent would of thosesurveyed rather undergo a full bodyscan. also showedThe CNNsurvey that 76 percent ofthe 27 percent saying they would be uneasy. Given the choice between a full-body scanner ora physical 82 pat-down, tion pollindicated that 72percent ofthepublicwould notbeconcerned aboutundergoing afull-bodyscanner, with personnel. were Scans security favored over by pat-downs a70to 22margin. The CNN/OpinionResearch Corpora alsosaid theywouldby Gallup prefer to undergo awholebodyscanrather thanaphysical from pat-down airport dergoing suchascan,withcloseto half(48%)saying theywould at all. notbeuncomfortable The travelers polled government screening program. CNN/Opinion Research Corporation released separate pollsshowing that almost80percent ofthepublicbacks whole bodyscannerssince theweeks following day theChristmas incident. 2009airplane At that time, and Gallup Ashley Halsey III, Washington Post, November 2010,p. 1--newdocument) more than 70 percent of those polled said the scanning program would not influence their travel(Jon plans.Cohen; butmostsaymachines asapotentialthat’s healthrisk, notabigconcern.” Despite thoseconcerns, thepoll found that the TSA, lessthan3percent oftravelers receive thepat-downs. “About athird seethenewscanning ofallAmericans posed the enhanced searchespat-down that are imposed on passengers who refuse to be scanned. According to thenewfull-bodysecurity-screening machinesat thecountry’s Halfofthosepolled,support however, airports. op But according to November 2010 Washington Post-ABC News public opinion poll, ofAmericans two-thirds nearly concerns.”someone withprivacy (Udall, February 2011,p. 1--newdocument). TSA’s for passengerswhorefuse policy AITscreening --hardly afullapt-down isto anidealalternative conduct for that are revealing“highly and many passengers are eing screened uncomfortable by the technology. Unfortunately, target recognition in all scanning machines by software 2012. Udall said the current technology produces images Mexico Sen. Tom Udallintroduced legislation requiring thefederal government to installtheadvanced automatic personnel.effects ontravelers andairport workradiation day. every to to studythetechnology’sThey work urged withindependent experts theagency health remain unanswered.” personnel couldThe receive concernedSenators were that airport multiple doses of particularly continues to“why purchase theDepartment thistechnology whenlegitimate concerns aboutitssafety appearto ment’s bodyscanner program plansto inlight expand ofpotential the airport healthconcerns. The lawmakers asked Richard Burr, R-N.C.;and Tom to wrotethegovern JanetNapolitanoobjecting to DHSsecretary Coburn, R-Okla., for addition,Senators practices. SusanCollins, In afullexplanation asking oftheprivacy R-Maine; Service Marshal

As the legality ofthe As thelegality TSA’s full-bodyscanner program continues to bedebated, thefederal government isin poll, the Gallup 67 percentIn said they of wouldthose surveyed not personally be “too uncomfortable” in un The November 2010publicopinionpollsshowed that travelers had slightly tempered theirenthusiasm for passengers EPIC officials havesay that hundredsfiled complaints ofairport aboutthe DHS’ increased screening. Marchquestioningthe 2011,theHouseheldhearings In TSA’s scanningprogram. February, In whole-body New But as evidence emerged that government hadsaved body imagescans, sixSenators sent aletter to theU.S. - - - - -

ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES JOURNAL: EDUCATION, PRACTICE, AND RESEARCH 49 - - - References

Goodison, Donna, 2010, “Logan Airport Looks Forward to Less Revealing Scanners,” Boston Herald, July 16. Herald, Boston Scanners,” Revealing Less to Airport Forward “Logan Looks Goodison, Donna, 2010,

Frank, Thomas, 2007, “TSA Looks Into Using More Airport Body Scans,” USA Today, October 7. Today, USA “TSA Airport More Into Using Looks Body Scans,” 2007, Thomas, Frank, Frank, Thomas, 2010, “Airport-Security Plan Calls for 500 Body Scanners in ‘11,” USA Today, February 3. February Today, USA ‘11,” 500 Body Scanners in for Calls Plan “Airport-Security 2010, Thomas, Frank,

Forgione, Mary, 2010, “New Uproar over Security Scanners After Agency Acknowledges Storing Images,” Los Angeles Angeles Los Security over Scanners Images,” Agency After “New Uproar Storing Acknowledges 2010, Mary, Forgione, 9,. August Times, Copeland, David, 2009, “Scanner Finds Hidden Objects, Not Flesh,” Boston.com, April 27. Boston.com, Hidden Objects, Not Flesh,” “Scanner Finds 2009, David, Copeland, Chase, Katie Johnston, 2010, “Lawsuit Challenges Airport Full-Body Scanners,” The Boston Globe, August 4. August Globe, Boston The Scanners,” Challenges Airport“Lawsuit Full-Body Katie 2010, Chase, Johnston, Buaras, Elham Asaad, 2010, “Body Scanners Violation of Privacy,” The Muslim News, June 25. Muslim News, The of Privacy,” Violation “Body Scanners 2010, Elham Asaad, Buaras, News ArticlesNews Amendment?” Texas Wesleyan Law Review,” 417–439. Review,” Law Wesleyan Texas Amendment?” Viña, Stephen R., 2001–2002, “Virtual Strip Searches at Airport: Are Border Searches Seeing Through the Fourth Fourth the Through “VirtualSeeing Airport: Searches at Border StripSearches Are 2001–2002, R., Stephen Viña, and Commerce, 73 J. Air L. & Com. 643-671. Com. L. & Air 73 J. and Commerce, Solomon, Julie, 2008, “Does the TSA Have Stage Fright? Then Why Are They Picturing You Naked?” Journal of Air Law Journal Law of Air Naked?” You Picturing They Are Why Then Fright? Stage Have TSA “Does the 2008, Solomon, Julie, Domestic Airport Security Checkpoints,” Santa Clara Law Review, 213-252. Review, Law Clara Santa Domestic Airport Security Checkpoints,” Mock, Tobias W., 2009, “The TSA’s New X-ray Vision: The Fourth Amendment Implications of ‘Body-Scan’ Searches at at Searches ‘Body-Scan’ Implications of Amendment Fourth The Vision: X-ray New TSA’s “The 2009, W., Tobias Mock, gers in a Post-9/11 World,” Brigham Young University Law Review, 1631-1667. Review, Law University Young Brigham World,” gers in a Post-9/11 Minert, Steven R., 2006, “Square Pegs, Round Hole: The Fourth Amendment and Preflight Searches of Airline Passen Airline of Searches and Preflight Amendment Fourth The Round Hole: Pegs, “Square Minert, R., 2006, Steven ies, Volume 20, Issue 2, 149-159. Volume ies, Mackey, David A., June 2007, “The ‘X-Rated X-Ray’: Reconciling Fairness, Privacy, and Security,” Criminal Justice Stud Justice Criminal Security,” and Privacy, X-Ray’: Fairness, Reconciling ‘X-Rated “The 2007, June A., David Mackey, makdap.com.au/docs/LAWorld%20Vol%2019.pdf. Lew, Jessica D., 2005, “Secondary Screening Procedures for Airports: Putdowns for Pat-downs,” Laworld, http://www. Laworld, Pat-downs,” for Airports: for Putdowns “Secondary Procedures Screening 2005, Jessica D., Lew, Amendment,” Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review, 385-412. Review, Law Angeles of Los Loyola Amendment,” Kornblatt, Sara, 2007, “Are Emerging Technologies in Airport Passenger Screening Reasonable under the Fourth Reasonable the Fourth Screening under in Airport Passenger Technologies Emerging “Are 2007, Sara, Kornblatt, Means,” Computer Law & Security Report, Volume 24, Issue 4, 316-325. Security & Volume Law Report, Computer Means,” Klitou, Demetrius, 2008, “Regulatory Other Body Scanners by – A Strip Backscatter Search Issues in Body Scanners, 2008, Demetrius, Klitou, Temple University Law Review, 1-60. Review, Law University Temple Harris, David A., 1996, “Superman’s X-ray Vision and the Fourth Amendment: The New Gun Detection Technology,” Technology,” DetectionGun New The Amendment: the Fourth and Vision X-ray “Superman’s 1996, A., David Harris, sibility,” Journal of Transportation Security,” Volume 3, Number 2, 73-85. 3, Number Volume Security,” Transportation Journal of sibility,” Abeyratne, Ruwantissa, March 2010, “Full Body Scanners Airports--the at Respon Between Privacy and State Balance “Full 2010, March Ruwantissa, Abeyratne, Journals ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES JOURNAL: EDUCATION, PRACTICE, AND RESEARCH 50 Air-Travelers-Body-Scans-Stride.aspx Poll,Gallup 11,2010, January U.S.,“In Air Travelers Take inStride,” Scans Body http://www.gallup.com/poll/125018/ Public OpinionPolling Yu, Roger, 2010, Group“Privacy Files Scanners,” Body Lawsuit to BlockAirport USA Today, July9. Wald, L.,2010, Matthew Scanners,”“Mixed Signals onAirport The New York 12. Times, January Vijayan, Jaikumar, “Travelers File Complaints Over TSA Scanners,” Body Business Week, March 8. Travis, Alan, 2010, Break“New Scanners ChildPorn Laws,” 4. The Guardian, January Talamasca, Akela, 2010, is Imaging Body “Whole Wholly Frightening,” Manolith.com, May 18. Stoller, Gary, 2010, Grows“Backlash Against Full-Body inAirports,” Scanners USA Today, July13. Sharkey, Joe, 2009, Pass Scans First Airport “Whole-Body Tests,” New York Times, 6. April Islam,’” New York DailyNews, July6. Shahid, Aliah, 2010, DeviceSay the Officials “Full-Body at Scrapped Airports, Dubai Scanners Security ‘Contradicts New York DailyNews, August 4. Shahid, Aliyah, 2010, “Feds Admit They Stored Images, Despite Scanner Body Cannot Saved,”TSA Be ClaimtheImages Saletan, William, 2009, Digital“Deeper Penetration,” Slate, 8. April 4. Rucker, Philip, 2010, “TSA Tries to Assuage Passengers’ Concerns About Full Scans,” Body The Washington Post, January Jeffrey,Rosen, 2010,“The Invasive, TSA is Annoying-and Unconstitutional,” Washington Post, Nov. 28, p. 6ofprintout) Pop, Valentina, 2010, “U.S. Europe Outstrips Scanners,” onBody Business Week, June23. Ovalle, Dan,2010, Screener Accused ofAttack Airport After“Miami Jeersat Genitals,” Herald, Miami May 7. Neiyyar, Dil, 2010, Concerns Delay“Sikh HandSearch Plans at UKairports,” BBCNews, June30. 1. 2010, Ben, Mutzabaugh, “Full-Body Could Scanners Pose U.S. Cancer at Airports, Risk Scientists Warn,” USA Today, July Jeanne,M.Ahlers,Meserve, andMike 2010, Can Scanners Store,“Body Images, Group Send Says,” 11. CNN,January Johnsson, Julie, 2010, “Airport Have Scanners Body Critics,Pope,” Including Chicago Tribune, February 23. Hunter, Marnie, 2009, Not Scanners “Body ‘Magic Technology’ Against Terror,” CNN,December 31. References

ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES JOURNAL: EDUCATION, PRACTICE, AND RESEARCH 51 ------References

peal.pdf records on radiation and health impacts http://epic.org/privacy/body_scanners/Body_Scan_Rad_Ap on radiation of scanners, records Electronic Privacy Information Center, August 27, 2010, Petition to Transportation Security Administration seeking Security Administration Transportation to 27, 2010, Petition August Electronic Center, Privacy Information org/privacy/airtravel/backscatter/petition_042110.pdf Electronic Privacy Information Center, April 21, 2010 petition to NSA to stop use of whole body scanners. http://epic. use of whole body scanners. stop NSA to April 21, 2010 petition to Electronic Center, Privacy Information images taken of passengers. http://epic.org/foia_1/gov20/TSA_Procurement_Specs_04_15_10.pdf images taken of passengers. Department of Homeland Security, September 10, 2009, “Procurement Specifications for Advanced Imaging Technol Advanced Imaging for Specifications “Procurement Department September 10, 2009, of Homeland Security, all airport that and transmit indicates document store body scanners must be able to Checkpointogy for Operations,”

Department of Homeland Security, July 23, 2009, “Privacy Impact Assessment Update for TSA Whole Body Imaging,” Body Imaging,” Whole TSA “Privacy Impact for Update Assessment Department July 23, 2009, of Homeland Security, http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_pia_tsa_wbiupdate.pdf

MinorityNews&ContentRecord_id=48bdf98d-5056-8059-76f0-36d9d201328e&IsTextOnly=False Collins, Sen. Susan, August, 18, 2010, Letter to Department to of Homeland Security 18, 2010, Letter Sen. Susan, August, SecretaryCollins, Janet Napolitano on http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Press. technology. scanning about concerns safety potential of the National Security, Homeland Defense, and Foreign Operations subcommittee of the Committee on Oversight on Oversight of the Committee subcommittee Operations and Foreign Homeland Defense, Security, of the National 1. p. House of Representatives, U.S. Reform, and Government Cissna, Alaska State Rep. Sharon, March, 16, 2011, testimony at “TSA Oversight Part 1: Whole Body Imaging” hearing Body Imaging” Whole “TSA 1: Oversight Part at 16, 2011, testimony March, Sharon, Alaska Rep. Cissna, State Reform, U.S. House of Representatives; p. 9. p. House of Representatives; U.S. Reform, curity, Homeland Defense, and Foreign Operations subcommittee of the Committee on Oversight and Government Government on Oversight and of the Committee subcommittee Operations Foreign and Homeland Defense, curity, Cate, Fred H., March 16, 2011, testimony at “TSA Oversight Part 1: Whole Body Imaging” hearing Se of the National Body Imaging” Whole “TSA 1: Oversight Part at 16, 2011, testimony H., March Fred Cate, ment Reform, U.S. House of Representatives; p. 2. p. House of Representatives; U.S. Reform, ment Brenner, David J., March 16, 2011, testimony at “TSA Oversight Part 1: Whole Body Imaging” hearing of the National hearing of the National Body Imaging” Whole “TSA 1: Part Oversight at 2011, testimony 16, March J., David Brenner, on Oversight and Govern of the Committee subcommittee Operations and Foreign Homeland Defense, Security, knowledging that whole-body scanned images have been stored on scanning machines. http://epic.org/privacy/ scanning machines. on knowledging whole-body that been stored have scanned images body_scanners/Disclosure_letter_Aug_2_2010.pdf Bordley, William E., August 2, 2010, letter from Justice Department to the Electronic Privacy Information Center ac Department Justice Center Electronicthe Privacy Information from to letter 2010, 2, August E., William Bordley, d7a3-4ccc-995b-895de5ec08e7 cial airports 2013. http://bennett.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=33dceac0- by Bennett, Sen. Bob, June, 24, 2010, introduced legislation requiring advanced imaging technology at all U.S. commer all U.S. at technology imaging advanced requiring legislation 24, 2010, introduced June, Bennett, Sen. Bob, Government and legal documents documents and legal Government

Washington Post, November 23, 2010, “Most Support Full Body Scanners,” p. 1. p. Body Scanners,” “Most Support Full 23, 2010, November Post, Washington com/2010/01/12/82156/poll-most-americans-would-trim.html Ipsos/McClatchy Poll, January 12, 2010, “Most Americans Would Trim Liberties to be Safer,” http://www.mcclatchydc. Liberties be Safer,” to Trim Would “Most Americans January 2010, 12, Poll, Ipsos/McClatchy http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/01/11/rel1aa.pdf CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll, January 11, 2010, Poll, Corporation Research CNN/Opinion ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES JOURNAL: EDUCATION, PRACTICE, AND RESEARCH 52 ment Act. http://tomudall.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=762 Udall, Sen. Tom, February 8,2011letter to colleagues onFAA Air Transportation andSafety Improve Modernization scanners. http://www.npr.org/assets/news/2010/05/17/concern.pdf ofwhole-body health risks Sedat, 6,2010,letter John,April from four scientists to White HouseScienceAdvisor JohnHoldren, onthepotential ings/index.asp?ID=242 Testimony before security theHouseCommittee onHomelandSecurity. onairport http://homeland.house.gov/Hear Rotenberg, Marc, March 17,2010, “An KeepingPassengers Are Airports Safe?” Our Security: Assessment ofCheckpoint http://www.dhs.gov/ynews/releases/pr_1279642622060.shtm ing TechnologyDeployments,” Napolitano, Janet, July20,2010, Napolitano Announces Additional Act-Funded“Secretary Recovery Advanced Imag scanners. http://epic.org/privacy/body_scanners/liebermanltr_body_scanners.pdf whole-body Information Privacy Center,Nader andElectronic Senators to on holdhearings September7,2010,letter asking MajorityNews&ContentRecord_id=8c23ed55-5056-8059-761a-a21459c5b48f body scanswere stored at Florida http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Press. courthouse. Joseph, August, Sen. Lieberman, 19, 2010, Letter from why six Senators to asking U.S. Service Marshals ernment Reform, U.S. HouseofRepresentatives; p. 2-4. tional Security, HomelandDefense, andForeign Operations subcommittee oftheCommittee onOversightandGov Kair, Robin; Kane, Lee; March 16,2011,testimony at OversightPart 1: “TSA Whole Imaging” Body oftheNa hearing program. http://epic.org/privacy/litigation/EPIC_v_DHS_Petition.pdf ofAppeals ofColumbia to suspendthe Court District Transportation Administration’s Security fullbodyscanner (TSA) Information Privacy Center,Electronic July2,2010,petitionfor review andmotionfor stay, anemergency urging the References - - - - -