I'm Going to Go With the ACLU On This One

I rarely find occasion to agree with the ACLU, but I think I'm with them on this one:

A lawsuit filed Thursday against the Transportation Security Administration alleges a Ron Paul supporter was unreasonably detained at the St. Louis airport because he was carrying about $4,700 in cash.

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit on behalf of Steven Bierfeldt, director of development for the Campaign for Liberty, an organization that grew out of Ron Paul's 2008 presidential campaign.

The organization had hosted an event in St. Louis that included the sale of tickets, T-shirts, stickers and other materials and Bierfeldt said he was carrying the cash proceeds in a metal box when he was detained at Lambert Airport for about 30 minutes on March 29.

The lawsuit does not seek money but asks the court to declare the TSA's actions unconstitutional and to prohibit the agency from similar searches when there is no evidence aircraft are endangered.

"It's obviously important that the safety of flights be ensured," Bierfeldt said in a telephone interview. "But subjecting innocent travelers like me who are doing nothing wrong — I think it diverts TSA away from its core mission of safeguarding air travel."

TSA spokesman Greg Soule said the agency would not comment on pending litigation.

Bierfeldt said he refused to answer when a TSA official asked what was in the box. Another TSA official arrived, and Bierfeldt was taken into a separate room where he used an iPhone in his jacket pocket to record the officials' questioning.

An audio clip provided by the ACLU includes repeated questions from a TSA official about why Bierfeldt was carrying so much money, and his repeated refusal to answer. On one occasion, the questioner swears and asks, "Is there any reason you're not answering questions?"

Bierfeldt answers, "Am I legally required to answer the question?"

Soule said while there is no limit to the amount of cash a person can travel with domestically, travelers must cooperate with the TSA screening process.

"Cooperation may involve answering questions about their property," Soule said. "A passenger who refuses to answer questions may be referred to appropriate authorities for further inquiry."

Bierfeldt's attorney, Ben Wizner, said the lawsuit does not challenge TSA's authority to search and detain those suspected of taking weapons, explosives or other dangerous objects onto planes.

"That's the whole purpose of airport searches," Wizner said. "These are not, however, open-ended criminal searches."

The reason for the existence of the TSA is to keep our airliners safe from those who would attempt to destroy or hijack them, and to ensure that dangerous objects are not taken on board regardless of the motivation. That's it. They are not a general purpose investigative organization, nor are they sworn peace officers. To my knowledge TSA employees do not undergo the types of training that would qualify them as peace officers in any of the 50 states. They are simply federal versions of the civilian contractors that used to do this work.

I have often carried large sums of cash on flights when returning from a quartet trip and have wondered if I would ever get questioned about it. It would be easy for me to prove that those funds were the result of product sales and offerings, but I still wouldn't be happy about going through an interrogation about it. It's none of their business how I came to possess the money.

I think the individual in this case probably brought trouble on himself that wasn't necessary by refusing to answer the questions, but if that's the way he wanted to play it the TSA shouldn't have pushed it since the presence of cash is not proof of a threat to the plane. The TSA does not have a right to have any question they can come up with answered by the traveler.

I hope the ACLU prevails on this one.