LASP Unconstitutional, Says Lawyer
AV Web
1/14/2009

An Atlanta lawyer and pilot claims the Transportation Security
Administration's Large Aircraft Security Program (LASP) is unconstitutional
and he's started a campaign to convince Congress of that.

Alan Armstrong says the stated goal of the program is to prevent aircraft
from being used to carry biological, nuclear or other weapons in attacks
against the U.S. But in a string of logic that could give some sectors of
the aviation industry fits if he's right, Armstrong claims the 12,500-lb.
lower limit on aircraft covered by LASP is "arbitrary and capricious"
because just about any aircraft can carry such weapons. Therefore, he
claims, the rule violates the Fifth Amendment which requires that laws be
"substantive." He's asking his own elected representatives to help strike
down the law and suggesting he'll take it to court if they don't.

Armstrong is calling for the rule to scrapped entirely. He doesn't address
what might happen if the TSA simply changes the rule to cover all aircraft,
something that might, quite legally, make matters worse. Indeed, Armstrong
reported that at the second of four public hearings into the rule in
Atlanta last week, there was a visible demonstration of the flying public's
disdain for the rule.

"One speaker ... called for everyone in the room who favored the
termination and abandonment of the [rule] to stand," he said. "With the
exception of a couple of young ladies, whom I suspect were TSA employees,
everyone in the room not only stood but applauded."