Since 9/11, air transportation has been one of the most important and closely watched areas of homeland security under federal control. Despite this centralization of authority, some states have begun to question some of the policies enacted by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). In 2011, Texas passed legislation that would have criminalized TSA officers for carrying out such policies, specifically enhanced pat downs of airport travelers. In light of threats from the Department of Justice, Texas ultimately backed down from the legislation, but the legal arguments made by participants on both sides remain relevant to future conflicts between state and federal authority on homeland security. The events in Texas are particularly interesting because they make public the tension between citizen preferences for security and civil liberties, highlighting the role of federalism in the homeland security domain. Using legal analysis, we find that federal power in the realm of aviation security given by the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause is less clear-cut than generally argued. Therefore, Texas’ attempt to assert its authority in this domain was not necessarily legally unsound.
Bali, V. (2009) “Tinkering Toward a National Identification System: An Experiment on Policy Attitudes,” Policy Studies Journal, 37:233–255.
Best, S. J., B. S. Krueger and S. Pearson-Merkowitz (2012) “Al Qaeda Versus Big Brother: Anxiety about Government Monitoring and Support for Domestic Counterterrorism Policies,” Political Behavior, 34:608–625.
Birkland, T. A. and S. E. DeYoung (2011) “Emergency Response, Doctrinal Confusion, and Federalism in the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill,” Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 41(3):471–493.
Huddy, L., S. Feldman, C. Taber and G. Lahav (2005) “Threat, Anxiety, and Support of Antiterrorism Policies,” American Journal of Political Science, 49(3):593–608.
Johnson, M. M. (2006) TSA to Begin ‘See-Through’ Scanning Technology Pilot Program at Phoenix Airport. In CQ Homeland Security. December 5, 2006.
Kettl, D. F. (2003) “Contingent Coordination: Practical and Theoretical Puzzles for Homeland Security,” The American Review of Public Administration, 33(3):253–277.
Kettl, D. F. (2006) “Is the Worst Yet to Come?” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 604(1):273–287.
Krane, D. (2007) “The Middle Tier in American federalism: State Government Policy Activism During the Bush Presidency,” Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 37(3):453–477.
Lord, S. (2010). TSA is Increasing Procurement and Deployment of the Advanced Imaging Technology, but Challenges to this Effort and Other Areas of Aviation Security Remain. Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection, Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives GAO-10-484T. Washington D.C.: United States Government Accountability Office.
Madison, J. (1961) “Federalist no. 39.” In: (C. Rossiter, eds.) The Federalist Papers. New American Library, New York: Penguin.
May, P. J., A. E. Jochim and J. Sapotichne (2011) “Constructing Homeland Security: An Anemic Policy Regime,” Policy Studies Journal, 39(2):285–307.
Regan, P. M. and C. J. Deering (2009) “State Opposition to REAL ID,” Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 39(3):476–505.
Ripberger, J. T. (2011) “Whither Civil Defense and Homeland Security in the Study of Public Policy? A Look at Research on the Policy, The Public, and the Process,” The Policy Studies Journal, 39(S1):77–91.
Sanquist, T., H. Mahy and F. Morris (2008) “An Exploratory Risk Perception Study of Attitudes Toward Homeland Security Systems,” Risk Analysis, 28:1125–1133.
Scavo, C., R. C. Kearney and R. J. Kilroy Jr. (2007) “Challenges to Federalism: Homeland Security and Disaster Response,” Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 38(1):81–110.
Schildkraut, D. J. (2009) “The Dynamics of Public Opinion on Ethnic Profiling after 9/11,” American Behavioral Scientist, 53:61–79.
Schneider, S. (2008) “Who’s to Blame? (mis) Perceptions of the Intergovernmental Response to Disasters,” Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 38(4):715–738.
The Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (JHSEM) publishes original, innovative and timely articles describing and assessing research and practice in the fields of homeland security and emergency management. JHSEM promotes a comprehensive and dynamic perspective, providing readers with up-to-date information regarding the evolving nature of the homeland security and emergency management fields.