Jonathan B. passes along a video of two people passing out flyers this past Friday about TSA opt out procedures. The Albany airport authority tries to shut down them and stops their filming. And the officer at the scene refuses to help.

When the airport authority is told by the police that the activists are within their rights, the tact changes to insistence that a permit is required along with $1 million in insurance, and then that the upstairs portion of the terminal is being closed except for ticketed passengers only.

I’m not sure what was accomplished here, except perhaps that the Albany airport may have been reminded that filming is permitted at the checkpoint, or at least that it is not against TSA policy to film there (as long as the screening process isn’t interfered with while doing so).

  1. MileValue said,

    That’s great work by the policeman.

  2. canuck_in_ca said,

    Great work by the deputy sheriff. I couldn’t believe when the PR gentleman (more like thug) asked for ID.

  3. DEQ11 said,

    The Alex Jones Show? So much for mainstream credibility. I have huge respect for Officer Lenic for standing up for the filmers though.

  4. David said,

    Kudos to Deputy Lenic for his professional handling of this incident. As for airport manager, he needs retraining on professionalism and the law.

  5. party_boy said,

    If possible, is there any email address where we can give kudos to Deputy Lennic superiors. I suppose the email address for the airport authority asking why Doug Meyers was harassing the public?

  6. MileageUpdate said,

    Shocked by the old guys in jeans. He’s old enough to know about freedom and rights. Doesn’t sound like he’s knowledgeable enough to hold that job.

  7. Teck said,

    Look at the way the deputy handles this, so cool, so professional, so friendly. :)

  8. MommyOfTwo said,

    Wow ! What composure by the Deputy ! In other countries it MAY have meant the gulag for the youngsters. Gratefully we reside here.

  9. When law enforcement stands up for peoples’ rights at airports… - One Mile at a Time said,

    […] posted a link to this pretty awesome […]

  10. Sam said,

    You can see the grumpy old man fuming inside.
    Guys like that needs to be fired.

  11. HansGolden said,

    Definitely a good ol’ fashioned officer of the law who’s there to protect our rights rather than take them away. It’s only dirty cops that need to worry about being filmed.

  12. Michael said,

    What Hans said.

  13. Ann said,

    Right. Because I’m sure none of you would mind being filmed while you were simply doing your job while people were being told how horrible you are and how to make your job harder.

    If you want to protest, if you want to complain, fine, but don’t go to the poeple on the field who can’t help you-people don’t have a say in it-and harrass them. The people who are simply trying to make a living and feed their families. Go to the top, go to the policymakers, go to the voting booth.

    When there’s a pothole in the road I can yell at the pothole all I want, but that’s not going to fix anything.

  14. HansGolden said,

    Ann, like I said earlier, if I was an upstanding TSA officer, I wouldn’t mind being filmed. The TSA officers at the Wichita Airport (my previous home airport), for instance, are extremely down to earth, friendly, and helpful. Filming them would not cast them in a bad light and I would be a bit surprised if they minded.

    Also, the flyers don’t “tell people how horrible” TSA agents themselves are, it just attacks the nonsensical TSA policies. TSA agents are people too and they know better than most people that some of the things they’re being instructed to do are moronic.

    Here’s the flyer: http://www.infowars.com/optout/

  15. ArizonaGuy said,

    @Ann – umm, what? They were handing out information to passengers who travel. Informing the people who travel, most of whom are probably eligible to vote. So there.

  16. Cdiddy said,

    Mixed feelings on this one. Certainly an excellent representation of what law enforcement should be. Kudos to that sheriff.

    However, I think the filming is counterproductive to the point the filmmakers are trying to make. They claim to be trying to protect the privacy of flyers, by having them opt out of the scans, but then film them and put their faces up on the internet for thousands of people to see? That’s way more of an invasion of privacy, in my mind, than going thru a nude-o-scope.

    @Ann: I’m not sure I follow your line of thinking. They weren’t filming the TSA at all, just the passengers walking through. I do agree that yelling/abusing people that are just doing their jobs for barely above minimum wage is inappropriate and has no impact on creating real systemic change.

  17. mikeef said,

    @Ann:

    These people didn’t go to somebody’s place of work. They went to an AIRPORT that belongs to the PEOPLE. It does not belong to the TSA.

  18. Storm said,

    One thing I don’t get about this interaction: The airport is absolutely entitled to require an individual or group to obtain a permit to hand out leaflets.

    The Supreme Court has held that an airport concourse is not a public forum (ISKON v. Lee). Thus an airport authority may impose reasonable, content-neutral restrictions on speech. A basic permit requirement is consistent with such a restriction (as is a requirement that leafletting, etc. may only be carried out in designated areas).

    Provided that (1) the Albany airport had such a requirement (most airports do) and (2) that the leafletters did not have a permit (they did not appear to), the airport had the absolute right to stop the leafletting and/or evict the leafletters from the terminal building.

  19. CardinalandGoldFan said,

    As an attorney, I just wanted to clarify regarding Storm’s remark.

    Yes, airports are not a public forum according to ISKON v. Lee, but the legal analysis was actually incorrect.

    That’s probably due to the fact that there were actually 2 cases involving ISKON and Lee. The first case, ISKON v. Lee, 505 U.S. 672, decided that airports were not a public forum and hence, bans against “solicitation” (such as asking for money) were acceptable.

    However, in the second case, Lee v. ISKON, 505 U.S. 830, the court found that the airport’s ban on “distribution of literature” (here referring to distribution of religious literature) was found to be a violation of the First Amendment.

    Thus, there is a key legal distinction between “solicitation” and “distribution of literature.” Bans on the former are permitted, while bans on the latter are not. The passing out of flyers here likely falls under the “distribution of literature” category as opposed to solicitation and hence, would be protected by the First Amendment. Thus, the airport most likely does not have the right to stop the leafletting or evict the leafletters.

  20. HansGolden said,

    CardinalandGoldFan, do malls fall into the same category as airports?

  21. HansGolden said,

    btw, Storm, thanks for the excellent question: I was thinking the exact same thing myself. CardinalandGoldFan, thanks for the excellent explanation.

  22. CardinalandGoldFan said,

    HansGolden, unfortunately, malls are treated differently from airports. In addition, the rules for malls vary on a state to state basis. For example, in California, they are considered a public forum. In other states, they are not.

  23. msp2anywhere said,

    I find it interesting the Mr. GreenShirt keeps his credentials tucked into his pocket.

    And who are YOU, sir?

    Props to the Deputies- professional, polite, and willing to actually think.

  24. Guy said,

    The officer just made an incredible effort in restoring my faith in the police.

  25. pawtim said,

    Great video, and a great story. I’d love to know the follow-up… I hope that airport employee who is intimidating the civil rights protesters was fired, of course. Probably he’s part of the old boys network though and received no punishment at all. The airport authority requires a $1 million insurance policy? Why don’t they just set it to $1 billion? I think just about equally reasonable.

  26. Gunsmoke said,

    According to New York’s Public Authority Law, this airport is not a government entity and is leased to the “Albany County Airport Authority”. The name is not indicative of being run by the County and the law indemnifies the County from any tort claims brought against the ACAA. No public funds are used for the airport, and if they were, that are considered loans and must be repaid. Here’s a court ruling of a case that could easily be applied to this video: http://www.aci-na.net/content/forty-wayne-airport-authority%E2%80%99s-rules-airport-expressive-activities-upheld-federal-court

  27. Add A Comment

home | top

View from the Wing is a project of Miles and Points Consulting, LLC. This site is for entertainment purpose only. The owner of this site is not an investment advisor, financial planner, nor legal or tax professional and articles here are of an opinion and general nature and should not be relied upon for individual circumstances.

Advertiser Disclosure: Many (but not all) of the credit card offers on the site are from banks from which we receive compensation if you are approved. Compensation does not impact the placement of cards other than in banner advertising (we do not currently control the banner advertising on this blog). We don’t include all US credit card offers available on this site. Instead, I write primarily about cards which earn airline miles, hotel points, and some cash back (or have points that can be converted into the same).

Editorial Note: The opinions, analyses, and evaluations here are mine and not provided by any bank including (but not limited to) American Express, Chase, Citibank, US Bank, Barclaycard or any other company. They have not reviewed, approved or endorsed what I have to say.