Investor's Business Daily, March 29th, 2007
Air Security: We've urged Congress to pass a law that protects airlines that kick suspicious passengers off planes from being sued. The House of Representatives has passed legislation that's about halfway there.
By a 304-121 vote on Tuesday, the House passed the Rail and Public Transportation Security Act of 2007 with added language that protects passengers who report suspicious activity from lawsuits.
The one-sided vote was something of a surprise. We expected more resistance in a House controlled by Democrats who are normally so observant of political correctness and solicitous of the trial bar. Which is not to say that the added language didn't cause a "heated debate," as the Washington Times described it.
Rep. Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat and honoree of the Mississippi Trial Lawyers Association, opposed the protection of "John Doe" passengers on the grounds that it would encourage racial profiling. "Absolutely they should have the ability to seek redress in a court of law," he opined.
The public should be concerned that Rep. Thompson -- whose largest campaign was heavily funded by lawyers and law firms, and who is chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee -- either cannot or will not recognize the obvious risk.
Protections for passengers grew out of a suit filed against US Airways by six Muslim imams who were removed from a November flight originating in Minneapolis and destined for Phoenix. The clerics were taken off the plane before departure when other passengers alerted the flight crew to their unsettling behavior.
While at the gate, according to police reports and witnesses, the imams made anti-American statements and provocatively chanted "Allah, Allah, Allah."
Once on the plane, they continued to raise concerns, reportedly refusing to sit in their assigned seats, instead locating themselves in the front, middle and rear of the cabin. Some moved back and forth, speaking to each other in Arabic, while one in the group acted as if he were blind so he could sit in another passenger's seat.
Was all this a dry run for a terrorist attack? Or an orchestrated effort to set up the litigation they eventually filed?
At the very least, the imams' behavior, coming five years after 19 Muslim men hijacked four airliners to carry off the most deadly terrorist attack in U.S. history, frightened some passengers. Their response was legitimate and must be protected. If it isn't, terrorists gain an edge.
Providing legal immunity for passengers isn't enough, however. Congress cannot neglect protections for the airlines. As long as they fear lawsuits, they'll be less inclined to remove suspicious passengers. For the sake of innocent human life, they should not be.
Copyright 2007 Investor's Business Daily, Inc.
