Texas Wins One in the House! TSA Throws a Tantrum

Texas Wins One in the House!
TSA Throws a Tantrum

The Texas House of Representatives has approved final passage of legislation on Friday, May 13th, nicknamed the Anti-'Groping' Bill, that prohibits inappropriate touching of travelers during security pat-downs.  

The bill's sponsor and author, Republican House member David Simpson told MSNBC, 

Indecent groping searches when innocent travelers are seeking access to airports and public buildings would be outlawed under this bill."  He added, "This has to do with dignity in travel."

The bill specifically outlaws public servants from, 

intentionally, knowingly or recklessly touching anyone’s anus, sexual organ, buttocks or breasts, including touching through clothing, and any manner of touching that would be offensive to a reasonable person.

Should the bill  pass the state Senate and signed in to law, TSA agents found guilty of violating this law could face a $4,000 fine and up to one year in jail.

The TSA, in its ongoing effort to exist above the law and outside the government restraints defined under the Constitution, had the audacity to quote the constitution in its defense.  The agency declared, via its official propaganda page, that Texas cannot do anything to restrict TSA procedures because, as a federal agency they are protected by the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

“Blogger Bob”, the TSA’s official on-line public relations mouthpiece wrote,

What’s our take on the Texas House of Representatives voting to ban the current TSA pat-down?  Well, the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article. VI. Clause 2) prevents states from regulating the federal government.

Oh, Blogger Bob, you couldn't be more wrong.  You see, there's also the Fourth Amendment, which protects “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches” without “probable cause”.  And as far as this blogger can recollect, no where in the Constitution does it declare that the federal government has the right to randomly search and touch Americans' privates.

That brings us to the Tenth Amendment, which gives States the right to pass their own laws against any federal law or statute that overstretches their limited authority granted by the constitution.  Let's read it!

The 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.

Therefore, when the federal government does what the federal government does best and abuses its power, the Tenth gives States the right to pass their own laws to protect themselves, and the citizens of that state.

The agency's contention that the Supremacy Clause bars states from regulating the federal government is absolute nonsense. The Supremacy Clause states:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

In other words, The constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any federal laws made in line with the constitution are supreme. No where does it say that states cannot regulate federal government.  Just as glaringly obvious, nowhere does it state a federal agency can write policy that trumps the Constitution.

Then again, why should we expect 'Blogger Bob,' or the TSA to even understand the Supremacy Clause when they violate the Constitution at every turn?  

Literally, I laughed out loud while reading the rest of his blog.  Particularly when he wrote,

Aviation security agencies worldwide have been using pat-downs long before TSA was created to prevent dangerous items from getting onto airplanes. The pat-down is a highly effective tool to resolve certain alarms and keep these dangerous items off of planes that could cause catastrophic damage.

That is their justification to sexually molest travelers -- Because other countries do it?  Well, I have news for you, TSA; other countries, worldwide, do not have the U.S. Constitution protecting their citizens.  I'm sure your "security measures" would do well in communist China, Soviet Russia, or Nazi Germany -- here, however, We The People are sovereign, not the federal government.  Sure, you can get a way with it for a little while, but when the people say 'enough is enough,' your days are severely numbered.

I know you, my readers, don't need to be told this, but just in case Blogger Bob or the TSA swings by this blog, I'd like to remind them that the Constitution (including the Supremacy Clause) exists to protect the people from abuses of power by the government.  The Bill of Rights enumerates additional restrictions on government power to further protect the people.

Much of the federal government hate those restrictions as they endlessly attempt to circumvent, pervert, or simply ignore them.  The TSA is no exception.

Allow me to briefly digress, because I'm suddenly reminded of G.W. Bush at the Hill in late 2005 while he was trying to get the Patriot Act, specifically the more draconian provisions renewed.  He was growing more and more irritated at his lack of dictatorial powers as he was met by a frustratingly large upwelling of both liberal and conservative detractors to the Patriot Act, which led to his now famous outburst,

I don't give a good goddamn!  I'm the President and Commander-In-Chief!  Do it my way!

At that point an aide tried to calm him by pointing out the obvious,

Mr. President, there is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.

To which President George W. Bush screamed back,

Stop throwing the Constitution in my face!  It's just a goddamned piece of paper!

Of course, we don't need to go back to 2005 for an example of our federal government's civil servants hating the limitations and restraints imposed on them by the Constitution, but most of them hide their contempt for it behind behind their inner-most thoughts, private meetings, secret society meetings, and occasionally within cleverly worded legislation.  It's rare that one of them simply snaps in a public place and outwardly denounces the very framework that this country is built on, not to mention their solemn oath.

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Completely ignoring the Presidential Oath of Office goes hand in hand with denouncing the Constitution, since the oath is specified in Article II, Section I, therein.


My apologies for getting so far off topic.  That happens from time to time.  Feel free to leave any comments.