Lawsuit Over MBTA's Totalitarian Practices

Home

Boston civil rights groups are planning to file a lawsuit to stop the "T" from instituting a policy that would require riders to be subject to searches (Boston Globe).

"Public transportation is a community resource that should be available to everybody without requiring people to sacrifice their constitutional rights in order to use it," said Michael Avery, president of the Massachusetts chapter of the National Lawyers Guild.

I am wholeheartedly against the search policy that the MBTA wants to implement. For a while, I have been thinking about how I would deal with it if they tried to search me. I realize that I'm a young, clean-looking white person, and the odds that I would be searched (MBTA claims it's random -- I don't believe that it can be) approach zero. But just because it probably won't affect me, doesn't mean that I can let it happen.

I decided that my morals require me to refuse any reqeust to search my property. If that means they won't let me on the train, then so be it. I'm not going to submit to an unreasonable search (without a warrant or probable cause) just because I have somewhere to be.

It seems like there's no shortage of lawyers in the Massachusetts chapter of the National Lawyers Guild who might like to make a case out of it. Bring 'em on.

Civil Rights | U.S. Law

State Action?
Submitted by poot (not verified) on 28 June, 2004 - 1:48pm.

I've never been %100 sure as to whether the MBTA is a fully privatized organization. I guess now's the time to find out. If they are private, the lawyers don't have much to work with.

Re: State Action?
Submitted by thatgoodnight on 28 June, 2004 - 2:13pm.

I had always assumed that it was not privatized... I keep seeing the "Your tax dollars pay to clean this vehicle" signs and equated that in my head with the MBTA being public.

Time to go do a little research...

MBTA Organization
Submitted by thatgoodnight on 28 June, 2004 - 2:27pm.

There's no clear statement on the MBTA website as to how its organized, but I'm going to have to guess that the MBTA is a government agency given that the MBTA chairman is the Massachusetts Secretary of Transportation, and one of the MBTA's stated goals (available in their annual reports on the MBTA website) is to "reduce taxpayer burden."

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that it's not private.

On searches and travel...
Submitted by Xuli (not verified) on 29 June, 2004 - 3:47pm.

"...my morals require me to refuse any reqeust to search my property...I'm not going to submit to an unreasonable search (without a warrant or probable cause) just because I have somewhere to be."




Sure, why not? I can't imagine submitting to any sort of person or baggage search just to get someplace - oh, wait a minute, this is standard procedure for flying. Who really needs to fly anywhere, though... clearly not you, based on your moral convictions.



I agree that the T's policy is not only a bit overbearing but also renders the T unusable. Anyone that routinely travels with a bag or laptop case and expects to get to work on time can not count on it until after the convention.



I think that the grounds you present here, however, are just foolish and indicative of a knee-jerk reaction. I'd be interested to see how well your resolve holds up when this inconvenience is a fading memory.

Re: searches and travel
Submitted by thatgoodnight on 29 June, 2004 - 4:00pm.

Searches and screening on airlines doesn't bother me one bit because air travel involves private corporations and private property (the planes). Furthermore, every single person who flies is subject to the screening -- no exceptions.

The MBTA doesn't want to screen everyone. I wouldn't have any problems walking through an explosive detector assuming that everyone who rode the "T" had to do it.

I don't believe that the searches the MBTA wants to do are constitutional. That's my problem.

Lexis Denied
Submitted by poot (not verified) on 29 June, 2004 - 7:02pm.

I searched on Lexis for an hour today for any MA or U.S. Supreme Court cases involving searches of passengers or their baggage on public transportation. I didn’t come up with a single goddamn case that’s on point. The closest I came was a drug case where a DEA agent was found to have had reasonable suspicion to search a passenger on a train (unsure if it was private or public train) who 1) lied about his place of departure and 2) paid cash for a ticket despite there being some sort of payment penalty involved.

Now granted, I think that’s B.S., but that’s beside the point. The point is, either I suddenly lost the research skills that have served me well in both law school and my job, or there’s just no case law about this yet.

If the latter is true, it’s a bad bad thing. No case law pre-9/11 bodes very ill if this gets up to the Supreme Court. Even the SJC isn’t as nice as they used to be, despite precedent after precedent clearly indicating that Article 14 affords greater protections than the 4th Amendment.

My prediction is that IF the MBTA is only going to do it for the DNC, then the SJC will uphold it. Heck, they might even rule on it before it becomes a practical non-issue for all the law-abiding passengers who didn’t have crack in their bags. But if the MBTA decides this is a new permanent fixture (doubtful, given the potential delays/overhead) then the SJC will probably strike it down.

Just my opinion. Not a lawyer yet, so it doesn’t constitute legal advice.