Comments on: Airport ID checks legally enforced?

EFF co-founder John Gilmore tells the 9th Circuit to reject a "secret law" requiring identification for commercial air travel.

[Pete Bardo]

Ignorance is bliss

I understand that if I am ignorant of any law, I am still required to understand and comply. What are there, a couple of hundred thousand laws we all need to know if we want to steer clear of trouble? That's not so tough.

Now there are secret laws? How do I avoid violating laws that I can't find out about? And how do I go about defending myself if I am accused?

Not even the defense counsel can find details about the law. How do we even know if we have violated a secret law--because some government official told me? Hey, they make mistakes all the time. That's why we have courts, isn't it? But how can the court rule on a law they can't research?

What country is this? What century? What freedom?

[macslut]

I was arrested twice for this...

I was arrested twice for this...and now I'm on double secret probation!

Seriously though, it's not like as if this would be hidden from everyone. Instead it's something that allegedly would be used to inform the airlines that they *must* have a compliant policy for screening.

IOW, if you were the CEO of United, you would know about this order.

More realistically, it seems like this was a *recommendation* and the airlines are so incredibly retarded as to not follow it.

One plane goes down as a result of not ID screening and you're the only airlines that doesn't check IDs...what would think would happen next?

As opposed to being just like all the other airlines that checks IDs, instills an improved sense of security, and doesn't bother or inconvenience the overwhelming vast majority of customers.

[R. U. Sirius]

Secret Laws?

While I don't object to showing an ID when I go to the airport, this article seems like it is about something far stranger. So the Bush lawyer is saying the adminstration makes its own secret laws?

When did it become constitutional for Bush to come up with his own "secret" laws? I thought that congress was the branch that writes laws, and the laws they write or abolish are debated in public.

Am I reading this correctly Cnet?

[ddesy]

Didn't you hear?

The Bush administration secretly suspended the constitution!

[aabcdefghij987654321]

Hum, starting to sound like police state

Maybe it's time we discuss what country we want our good old US of A to be...

It seems some people have taken liberties here.

[GEBERWEIN]

Secret Laws by Bush?

Where in this whole thing did it say that President Bush had anything to do with this? The rabid anti-Bush team has taken things to a new level. First it was the Hurricane that hit New Orleans - they said it was Bush's fault. Now a petty court fight over an ID card. The big issue is whether there is a law or not. More importantly is that the judges have apparently ignored the "in camera" concept where they examine security protected evidence in their chambers and determine if it applies to the case. One other thing is the US Attorney's statement that he knows of no right not to show an ID. HE obviously forgot the Constitution. Under the Bill of Rights it says (paraphrase) Ic the act is not forbidden by the Constitution or otherwise prohibited by law (specifically citing Congress and States) the people have the right to commit the act. Rights are NOT specified, acts are prohibited; otherwise it IS a right.

[Rachel42]

No secret laws, but...

Neither the President nor the Executive Branch can make laws.
Only Congress can make laws.

What happens is that congress gives a Federal Entity, such as the
INS or IRS, powers to >implement< laws that Congress has
passed. The Agency then issues rules that have the same effect
as laws, but they are not really laws. To fight them, you have to
work inside the Agency or get a court to rule that the Agency
has exceeded the authority given to it by Congress.

An example from recent history was the national 55 mph speed
limit. Neither Executive nor Legislative branches has the
Constitutional authority to declare a national speed limit. But
the legislature wanted to create one. So they changed the Rules
and Regulations of the Highway Act so that states could not get
Federal Highway Dollars unless they lowered the speed limit to
55. I believe that only one state did not lower its speed limit.
All the rest did, so they wouldn't loose the highway money.

It is through Agency Rules and Regulations that our lives are
mostly affected. Anyone ever hear of the IRS ;-)

[dargon19888]

What's all the fuss?

Ok,

Lets think about this...

First, what exactly is an "executive order" or mandate? Is it a law? Or are there laws that require one to follow a legal executive mandate?

I mean suppose that a President (prior to Bush) mandates that all passengers submit to an ID check prior to boarding or gaining access to an aircraft?

If the mandate doesn't violate the constitution, it should be legal, right?

C'mon. Lets get real. Theres always more than one way to skin a cat. There is more to this issue than what's in the court case.

[drlove4q]

you are so naive

They take away your freedoms one mm at a time until we don't have a democracy anymore. The terrorists have won when we bow down to these actions. Marion

[aottoson]

Secret Laws

Not sure what john is looking for, could someone please explain

Bush bashers Get a clue

Bush did not start the ID issue. If you want to bash Bush, use HIS actions. There are enough of them. The erosion of our Civil Liberties has been going on for decades.
For a much better understanding of the ID issue go to http://papersplease.org/gilmore/index.html

The ID issue came about under Clinton. Another lover of things secret. Just who was on that Health care committee anyway?