"Security" Workers In The Fake Cop Suits, AKA TSA Workers, Lose Their Immunity
Great news, thanks to Freedom To Travel:
We are extremely pleased to report that Plaintiffs prevailed in Pellegrino and Waldman v. TSA: TSA screeners are not shielded from lawsuits in cases of fabricated allegations, false imprisonment and other egregious and unlawful acts.
This case goes back to 2006, when Nadine Pellegrino and her husband, Harry Waldman, were returning to their home in Florida from Philadelphia. Two TSA officers alleged that Ms. Pellegrino assaulted them and insisted that she be arrested. Based upon the two TSA officers' false claims, Ms. Pellegrino was indeed arrested and charged with ten criminal counts, including aggravated assault, possession of instruments of crime, reckless endangerment, simple assault and making terroristic threats. Ms. Pellegrino was found not guilty of all charges, and during discovery it was determined that the TSA deliberately destroyed the surveillance evidence of Ms. Pellegrino's TSA encounter.
Ms. Pellegrino and Mr. Waldman are remarkably persistent and determined. In 2008 the couple lodged a claim with the TSA for $951,200 in damages to personal property, which was denied. They then filed a civil rights lawsuit for false arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. That case was dismissed based on an opinion that TSA officers are not subject to the Federal Tort Claims Act, and therefore are immune from prosecution.
Fast forward to 2018, when Pellegrino and Waldman had their case heard on appeal in the Third District Court. In a 2-to-1 ruling, the Court upheld the lower court's ruling. Pellegrino and Waldman then requested an en banc hearing. [A little definition: there are fourteen active appellate judges in the Third Circuit Court. The initial appeal was heard by a three-judge panel. An en banc hearing requests a ruling from all sitting judges.]
This is when Freedom to Travel USA became involved. We filed an amicus brief, joined by Restore the Fourth, Inc., in support of Plaintiffs. Our amazing counsel, Mahesha Subbaraman, wrote a very compelling brief, which was accepted by the Court. Two days ago the Court ruled, 9-to-4, that TSA screeners are indeed subject to the provisions of the Federal Tort Claims Act, and as such can be sued for misconduct.
THIS IS A HUGE VICTORY!!!
We are honored to have been a part of this victory, and we are eternally grateful for the remarkable tenacity of Pellegrino and Waldman, who have been fighting this for thirteen years. And we wish to thank our amazing counsel, Mahesha Subbaraman, whose brief in support of Plaintiffs was nothing short of brilliant.
FTTUSA presses on. We have filed briefs supporting plaintiffs before, and will continue to do so when the situation warrants. Thank you for your continuing support of our efforts.
Regards,
FREEDOM TO TRAVEL USA
Articles covering the ruling: Star-Tribune; Courthouse News; press release from the law firm at Yahoo; US News; and RawStory (with the bit about the table):
On Saturday, Bloomberg News reported that a significant new ruling from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia will enable airline passengers to sue the Transportation Security Administration for incidents like damaged luggage, overly handsy inspections, and wrongful detention.The case stemmed from an incident at Philadelphia International Airport, in which Florida woman Nadine Pellegrino was selected by TSA officers for additional screening. After the search, she crawled under an inspection table to retrieve her bags, and accidentally tipped over the table, which landed on an officer's foot. She was promptly arrested and charged with 10 federal crimes, including aggravated assault and "possession of an instrument of crime" -- the "instrument," they argued, being the luggage itself.
Power-mad little fucks.
Speaking of which...
My own article on standing up to the TSA.
Actually, Amy, the TSA Workers are still immune. See Title 28 U.S. Code Sec. 2679. The case involves an obtuse provision in 28 USC Sec. 2680 - the exception to the exception to the limit against the United States’ liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The FTCA is a limited waiver of sovereign immunity for monetary damages in negligence and certain intentional torts. One exception to the waiver is that there is no liability for actions arising out of battery claims. The exception to the exception is that if the government employee is a law enforcement personnel, then there is liability.
So, to summarize, because TSA screeners are now officially recognized under federal law as federal law enforcement personnel, the US can be held liable to pay damages for their batteries committed while they perform their duties. However, the TSA employees will not be personally liable. The Judgment Fund, money appropriated by Congress, pays the Judgment or Settlement - so it’s the taxpayers who pay.
The stories you quote aren’t clear on this. My guess is that the reporter depended on the Plaintiffs’ lawyers press release, instead of reading the court’s opinion and figuring out what it actually said. The Plaintiffs’ lawyers should be proud. This is an obscure and complex legal issue. But, they want to attract new clients, so they needed to simplify the message to “We won against the TSA, so our clients will get money” in language that a reporter could apparently comprehend and repeat. Still, it’s more juiced up to say TSA held liable, than to more accurately report that US taxpayers are left holding the bill. TSA Workers are now recognized by federal law as federal law enforcement personnel, so the Judgment Fund pays damages for their batteries on people waiting in line. This may not be the deterrent effect you were looking for.
Wfjag at September 3, 2019 3:01 AM
> TSA employees will not
> be personally liable
Let's do a social experiment. Remember how commenter Justin used to talk about gay marriage as experiment? He didn't mean it.
But I do, and it would work like this: For five years, say Jan 1 2021 to Dec 31 2026, every government employee up and done the ladder is personally liable for their job performance. Courts will sort everything out, and judges will be liable too. We'll go to the polls in Nov 26 to pass judgment on the result.
This is ridiculous and unworkable for about seven enormous reasons and a hundred thousand lesser ones... But it would still be cool, because I have an idiot's fantasies about making people who work for taxpayers take their responsibilities seriously. So many Americans are trying to bring some kind of sanctity into our secular public lives, and this would be a great way to start.
The details are forgotten, but I remember someone quoting Trump once about 20 years ago to show that he didn't know the difference between libel and liable.
Crid at September 3, 2019 4:08 AM
It sounds like we've turned the TSA into a lottery. Get aggressively searched and sue for a chance to win a million dollars. And the "repurposed mall food court workers" will do their part, continuing their handsiness and giving people grounds on which to sue.
And they've been unionized since the Obama administration. I cannot wait until their union argues that since TSA agents are considered law enforcement personnel they should be armed.
Conan the Grammarian at September 3, 2019 7:20 AM
Not surprised that this egregious behavior by TSA happened in Philadelphia.They suck. Several years ago a co-worker went through security line and when she went to retrieve her belongings on the belt, her cell phone was gone. The TSA agents refused to do anything about it even though they were the only people who could have taken it. Only because my co-worker is in law enforcement was she able to insist on the security footage being reviewed right then and there. A TSA agent was clearly seen taking the phone and she was able to get it back.
RigelDog at September 3, 2019 8:18 AM
I used to travel frequently through SFO and never had an issue with the TSA agents there. They were professional, polite, quick, and efficient. Amy's complaints about the TSA agents at LAX were a world away from my experience. Then, I saw an article comparing TSA agents at SFO to the ones at LAX and how many passengers each handled per hour. SFO agents were faster, by a huge factor. Turns out, the SFO agents were private contractors and the LAX agents were government employees. That explained a few things.
Conan the Grammarian at September 3, 2019 10:19 AM
So I'm in line to GTFO out of D.C., reading the big electronic signs warning us not to smartmouth the TSA as the TSA 'agent' yells orders like he's herding first-day inmates into the delousing room.
Here's an agency that's begging to be privatized.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at September 3, 2019 10:46 AM
I once harshed the hairdo off a TSA agent in Indianapolis who called us "boys and girls." That moment was ugly enough, but I made a point to remember her face. If I see her on the street, it will be bad times once again.
Also that other guy, the one with the eyepatch, from a couple of years earlier.
I have seriously considering hanging out downtown in the Circle City just for a shot at a random encounter.
I really, really hate the TSA.
Crid at September 3, 2019 12:16 PM
The worst TSA behavior I've observed has been in:
San Diego -- they very obviously choose young, attractive women for the bulk of the enhanced screening.
St. Louis -- they don't give a damn, and they are slow. Hour-long waits at the security line are common, and that's inexcusable for an airport that really doesn't have that much traffic.
Cousin Dave at September 4, 2019 6:58 AM
Flew out of Reno and got picked for an enhanced screening.
Me: Why?
TSA agent/broad: Because you look like a terrorist.
Complete authority and no repercussions. Imagine if they had guns and real badges.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at September 4, 2019 10:43 AM
Immunity?
Odd. At Savannah River Site, every operator, down to the lowly hourly worker, is liable under the Price-Anderson Act.
So there's a mechanism, at least, to make that happen for TSA "workers".
Radwaste at September 5, 2019 12:05 PM
Leave a comment