Amike

The No Fly List itself has not been ruled as unconstitutional. Its the procedures for people on the No Fly List to challenge their inclusion that was deemed unconstitutional by a federal judge about 7 years ago....

"According to media reports, there are more than 20,000 people on the No Fly List. Their only recourse is to file a request with the Department of Homeland Security's Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP), after which DHS responds with a letter that does not explain why they were denied boarding. The letter does not confirm or deny whether their names remain on the list, and does not indicate whether they can fly.

The ruling from U.S. District Court Judge Anna J. Brown in Portland found, “[W]ithout proper notice and an opportunity to be heard, an individual could be doomed to indefinite placement on the No-Fly List. … [T]he absence of any meaningful procedures to afford Plaintiffs the opportunity to contest their placement on the No-Fly List violates Plaintiffs’ rights to procedural due process.”"

https://aclu-or.org/en/cases/court-r...-be-reformed-0

Squeakygreaser

https://www.newyorker.com/news/video-dept/a-reporters-footage-from-inside-the-capitol-siege

Some good footage that gives context to the photos in the Senate of the ex mil. Pilot.

This video will definitely benefit him in court. He is actually one of the more level headed sounding people in there.
​​​​​

OOfff

one of the level headed people occupying the senate 🙄

rickair7777

Yeah I don't think it's going to help him much.

TiredSoul

I really can’t be bothered to read through 13 pages but how about:
14 CFR 61.153(c)
“Be of good moral character”

So I’m guessing a bunch should have their ATP revoked.

rickair7777

They FAA rarely uses that, and when they do it's pretty much only for conviction of a serious felony.

They are not in the morality adjudication business, they don't want to be, nor should they be. By the standards assumed when "good moral character" was written into the regs homosexuality, swinging, adultery, perhaps extra-marital sex, and some religions would be grounds for revocation. Some FSDO's would be more strict than others.

Best to just leave it with felony conviction, since nobody can really argue with that.

galaxy flyer

The one I know was an armed robbery conviction.

nottoday

I wish they would, half this board would be out of a job.

Squeakygreaser

I didn't say he was level headed, just on the more level headed end of the spectrum of the people in that room.

It's a very low bar.

I don't think he'll do more than a few months. A year tops.

​​​​

JamesNoBrakes

Yes, the legality of that is questionable in most cases, as in what defines "good moral character" and how it's measured at any one time.