baldeagle wrote:
In the cases that I've read, the plaintiffs all did something wrong. Either they weren't fully in compliance with FOPA or they made statements that hurt their cases. That gave the courts an opening to rule against them. Those cases are on appeal, and will probably go to the Supreme Court eventually, where the matter will be settled once and for all..
Since you don't include the names, but reference cases "on appeal" and "probably go to the Supreme Court," it appears you may be speaking of Torraco v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey and Weasner v. Suffolk County, New YorkAirport Authority. The cases includes three individuals, Torraco, Winstanley, and Weasoner.
It is important to note that
none of them "did something wrong."
In accordance with airline rules and federal regulations, they declared an unloaded firearm in checked baggage at a NY airport. Two of of the three were arrested (and possibly also the wife of one of them) for illegal possession of firearms, since they did not have NY Firearms Owner ID cards; the other, who had a FOID, was refused permission to board the aircraft (by the police, not the airline or the TSA) because he had an unloaded firearm.
All criminal charges were dropped by the DAs and the courts. The three individuals sued in civil court for civil rights violations -- it is these suits that the appeals court has ruled against, and that I hope are appealed to and accepted by the SCOTUS.
The NY and NJ Port Authority police have effectively taken the position that the FOPA does not apply, even though their arrests are not subsequently supported by the DAs and court.
