Discuss airport screenings from both the perspective of evidence being admissible and/or non-admissible in court

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Thousands of illegal weapons and other illegal objects are confiscated as a result of these administrative security screenings. Many of the seized items are then used as evidence in U.S. courts. The United States Supreme Court has not expressly held such airport screenings do not violate the Fourth Amendment. However, in ruling that the objects are admissible evidence, most courts hold that security screenings are administrative searches under the special government need for security. Other courts hold that such evidence is admissible because once individuals present their person and their property to a security checkpoint for screening, they have consented to the screening, and that consent cannot be withdrawn during the screening process. However, such evidence may be held inadmissible if a defense lawyer can establish that the "security officers looked to considerations other than safety in conducting the screening, such as when they are on the lookout for evidence of drug trafficking, the search loses its protective character." In United States v. Fofana, 620 F. Supp.2d 857 (S.D. Ohio 2009) the court held a search of closed envelopes in a passenger's carry-on bag violated the Fourth Amendment. While the administrative "screening" purpose justified the search of the bag, the TSA officer conducting the search stated she looked inside the envelope because she believed it contained a large quantity of cash, which was evidence of criminal activity. The court held that since the purpose of airport screening searches was to look for weapons or explosives, any search that had another purpose violated the Fourth Amendment.