This Stanford University student managed to get her name removed from the “no fly” list. She is only the first person to successfully challenge placement on the list, out of 875,000 names on it.
Pipkin and a team of lawyers handled the case pro bono, spending $300,000 in court costs and racking up $3.8 million in legal fees covering some 11,000 hours of work, she said. “Why in the United States of America does it cost that much to clear a woman’s name?†she asked in a telephone interview.
Glenn Reynolds notes, “A watch list is one thing. But a “no fly†list with 875,000 names? Banning someone from flying is a punishment. There should be due process.” Yes, there should be. I think it’s also worth noting that while the right to travel is an unenumerated right, people like Bloomberg and, ahem, Chris Christie, think it’s just fine to deny the fundamental, constitutional right to keep and bear arms by someone presence on this list. Does being guilty until you can spend 4.1 million dollars on attorneys the kind of due process the framers of the 5th and 14th Amendments were thinking of? It’s shameful that this is happening with people’s right to travel. We should not double down on this shame.
Not to disagree, but it figures that the sympathetic plaintiff who got this done is a nonimmigrant alien who’s pictured wearing an Islamic head-covering, who was apparently in the US on a student visa. Mostly it says something about the kind of people whose rights the majority of lawyers think are important. Americans hate lawyers because lawyers hate Americans.
Judge Alsup today issued his full judgement under seal, but made public an abbreviated version that we’re allowed to know about.
That right there is just sooooo wrong in and of it’s self!
Always remember that.
Whenever dealing with the govt you are only told “that we’re allowed to know about.”…..
Wasn’t the late Sen. Edward “Ted” Kennedy on the “no-fly” list? He got off of it, but then again he had political connections to … “expedite” his request.
Still, being the first “normal” person to successfully challenge her placement on the list is impressive, but I agree it should not require millions of dollars in attorney/legal fees and likely years of waiting. That stinks, and seems more akin to being put on a sex offender list without a trial – or even a charge – than anything resembling a national security concern.
I would point out that the late Senator Kennedy (who is still drunk) was a threat to national security and a real turd. I know it is hot as hell where he currently resides. Good riddance!
Is there any recourse to recover costs necessary for removal from the list? Will the government pay for what was obviously an error?
Courts have ruled that the freedom to travel is indirectly guaranteed by the 1st amendment. If you can’t travel you can’t assemble.
I’m too lazy right now to look up the details. Google it.