home

Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches

The ACLU has lost its case challenging the constitutionality of the New York Subway searches.

The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday rejected a challenge to the searches by the New York Civil Liberties Union, saying that a lower court judge properly concluded that the program put in place in July 2005 was "reasonably effective."....The appeals court said it was proper for Judge Richard M. Berman to conclude that preventing a terrorist attack on the subway was important enough to subject subway riders to random searches. The text of the opinion is here.

In its written ruling, the appeals court noted that New York's subway system is an "icon of the city's culture and history, an engine of its colossal economy, a subterranean repository of its art and music, and, most often, the place where millions of diverse New Yorkers and visitors stand elbow to elbow as they traverse the metropolis."

The court said that in light of how many people use the subway, it was "unsurprising and undisputed that terrorists view it as a prime target."

This doesn't mean we can't remind the searchers of the Fourth Amendment as they go through our bags.

So let the 4th Amendment speak for you as you hand your bag over for a search by a subway or airline security guard. It's a silent protest and reminder to authorities that you consider searches without reasonable suspicion or probable cause to be an infringement of your privacy rights. Graphically challenged as I am, I designed them myself, so you can't get them anywhere else.


Larger photo here. Order here.


Larger photo here. Order here.

They also make great gifts, particularly for your college kids that are heading back to school.

How appropriate to hand a bag that reminds the officer of the wording of this great Amendment as he or she is searching through your personal items without a warrant or probable cause.

< Friday Open Thread | Israeli PM Endorses Cease Fire >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#1)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 01:01:34 PM EST
    This comes as no surprise to anyone, including the ACLU. Traffic checkpoints to stop DWI set the precident. The greater good trumps the rights of the individual. A murky line to say the least.

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 01:16:40 PM EST
    A bit offtopic, but I have never been in the NYC subway and have only seen pictures of it in movies (Beneath the Planet of the Apes, The Taking of Pelham One Two Three) and TV Shows (Beauty and the Beast). Can someone explain to me what this means: a subterranean repository of its art and music.... Thank you

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 01:37:59 PM EST
    I have a question. I think I already know the answer but I figured I would ask. If while they were randomly searching me, and they found something illegal but unrelated to terrorism, can i still be arrested for it. I ask, because I know with search warrants you have to very clearly state the area you wish to search and what it is you think you'll find. And if you find something unrelated, or outside of the stated area it can't be used against you. Does the same principle apply to these kinds of searches?

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#4)
    by Che's Lounge on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 01:55:30 PM EST
    freaktown, (great moniker) I believe when the law was first passed that several people were busted for possession during bag searches. But I am not positive.

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#5)
    by Dadler on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 02:21:15 PM EST
    By this court's weak rationale, random checks are justified anywhere in the United States, at any time, for any reason justified by terrorism fears. If the subway is a prime target, is not the nation itself a MORE likely target? This court seems to entirely miss the point. Or be aware of their own comical lack of reason. When a grocery store is bombed or machine gunned by a terrorist, will we then frisk and search all people before they enter stores? When terrorists then begin bombing and shooting up the parking lots of these places, will we then start frisking and searching before people enter these lots? The hysteria created, the fear exploited, the thoroughly illusory and REactive "security" response (as opposed to proactive), are designed for political and monetary gain as opposed to real security and freedom and peace.

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#6)
    by jen on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 03:01:34 PM EST
    Dadler: Be careful what you use as an absurd example. Once, arguing about the PCness people wanting to change team names, I said "next thing you know they will change the name of the Bullets"

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#7)
    by Dadler on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 03:03:26 PM EST
    Jen, I'm dumb right now. Elaborate for me please, I want to understand.

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#8)
    by Dadler on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 03:11:18 PM EST
    Jen, Now I get it. I apologize, had my son tossing a nerf ball off the side of my head. Only three more weeks until he's back in school!!

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 05:21:05 PM EST
    The airline search situation was referenced already; such searches arguably might be unconstitutional, but they have been allowed for years. So said the Supremes. A federal court would have to be loyal to such precedent. Now, perhaps, the subway situation is different. [BTW, you can refuse and leave the station, for what that is worth.] But, I think one has to face up to the situation, and spell out the line one wants to draw. Does Talkleft find these searches specially troubling; the cite of airports suggests not. The bags look nice though. Good idea.

    [btw I do take the subways, often carrying a shoulder bag. Never was stopped and I do find the whole thing somewhat dubious. Still, one is not surprised with the verdict. Also, the oral argument was on C-SPAN. The judges were not friendly to the ACLU lawyer, who was a tad bit snide at times, perhaps because he knew it was a lost cause.]

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimcee on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 07:26:21 PM EST
    If one has a problem with being searched prior to riding mass-transit they do have a choice....ride a bike, call a cab, walk or call a friend. Seems pretty simple to me. That the ACLU lost isn't that surprising unless one is an absolute idiot. You can refuse the search and not ride on the train or you can submit and get on the train. I guess the question is if you want to get home via the train you might be searched but get home in one piece. If you think no one should be searched then you feel your perceived civil rights are more important than being killed because someone brought bombs onto your train as has happened in both Spain and London. So you're dead or maimed but hey, your 4th amendment rights were preserved. Please explain where I'm wrong. I'd rather be safe on public transit than I would about worrying being busted for a joint. How about you?

    The bags are nice, but we don't need to allow them to be searched. If a NYC cop wants to search your bag on the subway, the best way to protest would be to politely refuse, turn around, and walk out. Then do exactly what the terrorists would do, and just enter at the next stop.

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#13)
    by squeaky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 09:29:52 PM EST
    bjstrykker -And what if you are already on the train? That is a problem. I do not think that you have any choice in that matter.

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#14)
    by Johnny on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 10:01:51 PM EST
    Jimcee explaining how easy it is to enter a police state.

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#15)
    by bad Jim on Sat Aug 12, 2006 at 12:18:04 AM EST
    I've already got a tote bag with a laundry tag that reads
    Nous sommes desoles que notre president soit un idiot. Nous n'avons pas vote pour lui.
    (We're sorry our president is an idiot. We didn't vote for him.) I suppose I could mount my ACLU card in a luggage tag.

    Re: Appeals Court Upholds Random Subway Searches (none / 0) (#16)
    by zak822 on Sat Aug 12, 2006 at 07:21:14 AM EST
    I think it's clear that the Constitutional requirement for "probable cause" is now a dead issue. "Reasonable suspicion", otherwise known as "if they feel like searching you", is now the law of the land. All those loud conservative voices that used to scream for us to stick to the original intent of the Founding Fathers are as silent as church mice. Makes me believe that they were nothing but hypocrits from the beginning. They could have affected the debate on these issues, but chose instead to sit quietly on the bench.