When Steve Bierfeldt, the Campaign for Liberty Staffer, was stopped and held for carrying $4,700 while going through airport security, the TSA explained that he violated their basic rule : Just do what you’re told.  If people would just cooperate, it would make our government’s job so much easier.

Quietly, the TSA backed off after suit was filed by the ACLU on Bierfeldt’s behalf.  As reported by the Washington Times :

The new rules, issued in September and October, tell officers “screening may not be conducted to detect evidence of crimes unrelated to transportation security” and that large amounts of cash don’t qualify as suspicious for purposes of safety.

Taken at face value, this is huge. 

But that, of course, is the ACLU’s version of the new rules.  Does it mean that the government will no longer check laptop computers for pornography?  Does it mean that they will limit their inquiry only to weapons and explosives?  What does the TSA have to say?

TSA spokeswoman Lauren Gaches said the new “internal directives” are meant to ensure their screeners are consistent. She acknowledged the policy on large sums of cash had changed, but wouldn’t provide a copy of either document. She said the directives would not be released unless a Freedom Of Information Act request was submitted by The Washington Times.

“TSA routinely assesses its policies and screening procedures to ensure the highest levels of security nationwide,” she said. “Currency alone is not a threat, and TSA does not restrict the amount of currency a traveler may carry through the checkpoint.”

A few little details appear to distinguish what the TSA has in mind from what the ACLU thinks it got.  While the amount of currency, alone, may no longer suffice to hold a traveler, what about the multitude of other things that might give rise to screeners deciding to play cop?  It’s rather outrageous, and ridiculous, that a government agency has issued directives to its personnel but refuses to release them to the Washington Times without a FOIA request.  Why are they keeping the rules a secret?

Nothing that spokeswoman Gaches said suggests that the TSA is going along with the ACLU’s vision of limiting screening to weapons and explosives.  At best, they are agreeing that cash alone isn’t a sufficient reason to detain and question a traveler.  But what of cash and furtive movements, excessive nervousness, unacceptable responses to commonlaw inquiries? 

And if TSA screeners are supposed to be consistent, what about the sideways glance  and wink at the Customs agent, or the local cop, or anybody else in a uniform with a gun who might be interested in asking a few questions?  They aren’t subject to the TSA’s directives, and there remains no constraint, as the ACLU suggests, on their asking whatever questions, and taking whatever actions, seem like a good idea at the time.

Frankly, one of my biggest fears is that some militant terrorist is going to board a plane with a roll of dollar bills and hurl it with great velocity at the head of one of the flight crew.  Can you imagine the havoc that would wreak?  It’s the Shoe Bomber Affect, one wild-eyed doofus’ misguided attempt to place explosive in his shoe has caused untold millions of people worldwide to walk barefoot through metal detectors.  One man with bad hair did this to hundreds of millions of people.  The possibilities are mind-boggling.

The good news is that this change in policy may well impact the natural inclination for those in uniform to feel entitled to question or challenge any conduct that strikes them as worthy, as we pass through a screening process that presents an extraordinarily intrusive opportunity to inspect us.  But this hardly reaches the panacea of limiting searches at airports to just weapons and explosives, as much as the ACLU would believe the contrary.  A step in the right direction.  A small step.