The Legal Validity of Administrative Searches: A Case Study of TSA Screening

Abstract

Administrative Searches Post [Name] The Fourth Amendment well protects searches for evidence. However, the same Amendment protects individual privacy in any search for evidence or seizure. Our current case is a scenario that does not require the signing of search consent as TSA screening proves a vital requirement that enhances safety within airports. In its simplest form, TSA serves as a security screening procedure that aims at achieving the highest levels of transportation security. To this effect, the TSA officials who conducted an administrative search to the defendant worked by the law to enhance airport and transportation safety from the time of arrival through departure and arrival to the desired destination. The TSA officials had the right to incorporate unpredictable security measures on the defendant and the entire team to ensure that they posed no danger to the transportation process by traveling with only the authorized stuff. Marijuana is among the unauthorized stuff; thus, finding it during a search proves potential physical evidence that defines the legibility of defendant arrest and trial in this court. TSA incorporates unpredictable security measures leaving their target population without a choice to sign consent for such searches. However, the idea of TSA search is not to arrest people but rather to ensure safety within and outside airports unless they encounter evidence that renders the target to be held under the law. It is imperative to note that TSA works closely with the intelligence and law enforcement committee to share information. To this effect, if a search yield results contrary to the TSA expectation, the intervention of law enforcers becomes realized to ensure the correct measure is taken to the victim. In our current case, the TSA conducted their regular search and came across unauthorized stuff that did not require to...