No-fly' list just won't fly

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) deserves praise for the class action lawsuit filed yesterday against the government's "no-fly" list. Names on the list are subject to increased scrutiny, denied boarding, or detention. The ACLU opposes the database on the grounds that it is an unconstitutional violation of search and seizure protections. But the reality is that the list is too unwieldy and easy to circumvent to merit its continuance in its current form.

The ACLU's clients are upset because someone with their same name was placed on the list, and each time the client flies he or she is flagged. This has led, according to the ACLU, to repeated searches and detentions. There is no way to be removed from the list, and many of the names on the list are relatively common. Michelle Green, David Nelson, and Alexandra Hay are all listed as potential terrorists and form part of the class action lawsuit.

The constitutionality of the "no-fly" list is questionable, especially given the government's lack of transparency about the list. The Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) denied the list's existence for some time. Once Freedom of Information Act requests were filed on behalf of people whose names were on the list, the government acknowledged the list existed but refused to elaborate. It is not known how many people are on the list, how people qualify to get on or off the list, nor will the TSA confirm any names on the list.

In some cases, the TSA provided people with letters clearing them of suspicion, but they were still subject to searches and delays. The ACLU rightly argues that innocent people are repeatedly and unduly paying the price for the government's inability to get the intelligence right.

While the creation of such a list is certainly a useful step towards making the skies safer, the current situation is intolerable. If the government were more open about the list in the first place and enacted a secure method of quickly and permanently clearing innocent travelers, then it would make some sense for it to remain in place. Fingerprint scanners would be one easy way for travelers to demonstrate they are not the intended target.

Even so, the government would be remiss to put much stock in a name database. Any college student in America can obtain a high quality fake-ID for under $100. If such IDs will pass the intense scrutiny of a bouncer with a scanner, it is highly doubtful an airline gate agent will detect fake IDs.

The government is trying to put systems in place to better verify identities, but for the time being any terrorist with access to a New York bodega can circumvent the 'no-fly' list.

In the post Sept. 11 world, we ought to be willing to sacrifice some amount of civil liberty for the protection of all. But such sacrifices should only come when the policy in question is limited in scope, crucial to safeguard the public, and streamlined to minimize inconvenience for law-abiding citizens. The TSA's 'no-fly' list has a long way to go before it will meet such a lofty standard.