Yeah you could do it but you'd get sued and almost certainly lose.

Just like a CBA could not ban women or minorities from upgrade.

Congress can do whatever they want. They could call an emergency session at 0200 tonight and vote to pass the law, and Joe could sign it after breakfast.

That's not typically how they do business though, so I'm sure there would be the usual staff and committee process for something like this. The one time I'm aware of that a vote was taken and passed within hours was when they declared war on Japan on Dec 8th.

Also foriegn countries might have relevant medical data but there are labor, business, and political issues to consider too. It's a tough issue because businesses want it, so that makes it bad. But some union workers also want it, which makes it good. And some other other union workers (and the victim's families) don't want it, which makes it all very confusing.

Hard to say but my SWAG is that this will have to get chewed on for a couple years, and it will depend on how bad the air travel situation gets... bad enough and the pols will want to do something just for the sake of appearing to be doing something.

Netjets has plenty of data on pilots flying into their 80's. If I remember right they sucked Harvey Watt dry when they would go out on LTD. I think the number one claimed disability was mental illness. True story.

Cognitive issues, not mental illness.

This is about age 67. So you throw out age 80 data. Good one.

If they keep kicking the can down the road, the FAA flight physical might actually have to become, you know, a physical.

My guess is, if that happened, they’d lose 20% of current staffing—guys who are currently pencil whipped into the air would be LTDing in droves.

Good point.

True statement and I'm sure the airlines are watching carefully... they should balk pretty hard at any additional screening which would affect those under 65, that would likely be counter-productive to staffing.

However... we've had age 65 for 15 years now and I don't recall any geezer-induced accidents in the US, so maybe they can retain status quo up to age 65.

Awful lot of prognosticating, hand wringing and teeth gnashing on this thread but there's a big difference between this and last time. Last time ICAO had already raised it and the US was moving into compliance. This time we are ahead of ICAO and that's gonna a create a lot of issues. I say that makes it less likely. I say Mr. Rogers (Lindsey) is just attention seeking as usual. Even airline managements won't get behind this because keeping fat cats at the top of the seniority list longer is counterproductive and will scare even more entrants out of this industry.