EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program)

• Background |
• EPIC's 2010 Lawsuit |
• EPIC's 2016 Lawsuit |
• News |
• Resources

Introduction

EPIC has challenged the use of airport body scanners since they were first tested and introduced by the TSA in the mid 2000s. First, EPIC sued to obtain records outlining the invasive screening capabilities, potential health risks, and traveler complaints logged by the TSA. Then, in 2011, EPIC successfully sued to require the Department of Homeland Security to undertake a public notice on and comment rulemaking on the use of body scanners in U.S. airports. EPIC argued that "the TSA has acted outside of its regulatory authority and with profound disregard for the statutory and constitutional rights of air travelers" and the D.C. Circuit agreed. The court ordered the agency to "promptly" undertake notice and comment rulemaking, allowing the public to comment on the body scanner program.

The TSA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in March 2013. EPIC then filed extensive comments opposing the TSA's proposed body scanner rule. The agency subsequently issued a notice modifying the airport scanning procedures that claims the authority deny passengers the ability to opt-out of the bodyscanners. Then, in March 2016, the TSA issued the final body scanner rule. EPIC filed suit in May 2016, challenging the final rule. The D.C. Circuit will hear oral arguments in the case, EPIC v. TSA, No. 16-1139, on April 7, 2017.

Top News

• EPIC to Request Kavanaugh White House Records on Warrantless Wiretapping, Mass Surveillance Programs: EPIC is planning to submit a Freedom of Information Act request to the Bush Library and the National Archives and Records Administration for records concerning programs of mass surveillance and Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh served as Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary for President George W. Bush between July 2003 and May 2006. During that time, the Bush administration undertook a wide range of mass surveillance programs, including the warrantless wiretapping of Americans, which was later deemed unlawful. On the federal appellate court, Judge Kavanaugh wrote that a suspicionless surveillance program "is entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment." "Critical national security need outweighs the impact on privacy occasioned by the program," wrote Kavanaugh. Other programs backed by the White House when Judge Kavanaugh served as White House Staff Secretary include Total Information Awareness, airport body scanners, and Real ID. (Jul. 30, 2018)
• Senators Urge DHS to Address Concerns Over Facial Recognition at Airports; Conduct Public Rule-Making: In a letter to DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielson, Senators Edward Markey (D-MA) and Mike Lee (R-UT) urged the agency to promptly conduct a public rulemaking on the agency's biometric exit program prior to any expansion of the program. The program, currently implemented in nine U.S. airports, requires travelers on departing international flights to submit to facial recognition identification. The Senators requested that DHS determine the accuracy of the technique and the procedures for collecting passenger data. EPIC is currently pursuing documents about the biometric exit program, but documents EPIC obtained about a related program that tested iris and facial recognition scanning at the border revealed that the technology did not perform operational matching at a "satisfactory" level. An earlier EPIC lawsuit against the DHS led to the removal of backscatter x-ray devices — "body scanners" — at US airports. (May. 11, 2018)
More top news »
EPIC Urges Congress to Suspend Facial Recognition At US Airports » (Feb. 26, 2018)
EPIC has sent a statement to the House Homeland Security Committee in advance of a hearing on the Transportation Security Administration. EPIC urged the Committee to limit the collection of biometric data at US airports. EPIC described the growing use of facial recognition that capture the images of US travelers. EPIC also pointed to a recent study that found racial disparities with the technique. EPIC previously pursued a significant lawsuit against the TSA that led to the removal of x-ray body scanners from US airports. EPIC is currently seeking records from Customs and Border Protection concerning the accuracy of facial recognition.
Republican DACA Bill Would Expand Use of Drones, Biometrics » (Feb. 21, 2018)
The Secure and Succeed Act (S. Amdt. 1959 to H.R. 2579), sponsored by several Republican Senators, would link DACA with hi-tech border surveillance. Customs and Border Protection would use facial recognition and other biometric technologies to inspect travelers, both US citizens and non-citizens, at airports. The bill also establishes "Operation Phalanx" that instructs the Department of Defense—a military agency—to use drones for domestic surveillance. EPIC has pursued many FOIA cases on border surveillance involving biometrics, drones, and airport body scanners, In a statement to Congress, EPIC warned that "many of the techniques that are proposed to enhance border surveillance have direct implications for the privacy of American citizens."
EPIC Urges Senate to Block Biometric Collection At US Airports » (Sep. 28, 2017)
EPIC has sent a statement to the Senate Commerce Committee following a hearing on the Transportation Security Administration. EPIC urged the Committee to limit the collection of biometric data at US airports. EPIC described the growing and regulated use of biometrics in US airports, often targeting US citizens. EPIC previous pursued a significant lawsuit against the TSA to limit the use of body scanners. EPIC is currently seeking records from Customs and Border Protection concerning the agency's use of facial recognition for a biometric entry/exit program at airports. EPIC has also objected to a proposal to increase the collection of biometric data for the TSA Pre-Check program.
EPIC Obtains Final Report on "Face ePassport Air Entry Experiment" » (Sep. 8, 2017)
As the result of a Freedom of Information Act request, EPIC has obtained a report on the use of face recognition on travelers entering the United States at Dulles Airport. The report was obtained after EPIC filed a lawsuit against Customs and Border Protection for documents about the agency's biometric entry/exit program, expedited by Executive Order 13769. As the report was heavily redacted, EPIC's FOIA lawsuit is ongoing. In a statement to the House Homeland Security Committee earlier this year, EPIC warned that biometric identification techniques, such as facial recognition, lack proper privacy safeguards. EPIC has extensively litigated airport screening techniques, including EPIC v. TSA, concerning airport body screening.
TSA Proposal to Inspect Books at US Airports Raises First Amendment Concerns » (Jun. 27, 2017)
The TSA is considering a requirement to remove books from carry-on luggage for inspection during security screenings. The procedure raises concerns that individuals may be singled out for their religious and political beliefs, implicating core First Amendment values. In 2015 a college student won a $25,000 settlement after he was detained by the TSA for carrying Arabic flash cards. EPIC has pursued litigation against invasive airport screening techniques. In EPIC v. DHS, EPIC successfully sued to require the Department of Homeland Security to obtain public comment on the use of body scanners in U.S. airports. The litigation also led to the removal the backscatter x-ray devices from airports. EPIC recently filed a FOIA request to determine why US travelers returning to the United States are subject to biometric identification. In numerous cases, including a recent case before the US Supreme Court, EPIC has argued for the freedom to without government surveillance.
DC Circuit Rules in Second EPIC Airport Body Scanner Case » (May. 30, 2017)
In a cursory per curium opinion, the D.C. Circuit denied EPIC's petition for review of the TSA's final rule mandating body scanners in U.S. airports. EPIC argued in EPIC v. DHS II that the TSA had failed to justify body scanners as compared with less invasive, more effective screening techniques, such as magnometers combined with explosive trace detection. Public comments overwhelmingly favored EPIC's recommendations to the federal agency. EPIC also argued that the TSA's decision to end the opt-out was contrary to the DC Circuit's earlier opinion EPIC v. DHS I which held that passengers could opt-out of the invasive screening technique. As Judge Ginsburg explained in the earlier case, "Despite the precautions taken by the TSA, it is clear that by producing an image of the unclothed passenger, an AIT scanner intrudes upon his or her personal privacy in a way a magnetometer does not." Judge Ginsburg further said, "any passenger may opt-out of AIT screening in favor of a patdown, which allows him to decide which of the two options for detecting a concealed, nonmetallic weapon or explosive is least invasive."
EPIC to Congress: Examine TSA Secrecy » (Apr. 26, 2017)
EPIC has sent a statement to the House Committee on Homeland Security for an oversight hearing on the Transportation Security Administration. EPIC has objected to the TSA's refusal to release information the agency designated as "sensitive security information" that is pertinent to EPIC's ongoing case against TSA regarding airport body scanners. EPIC said that the TSA is "seeking to hide its decision making behind this cloak of secrecy." Congress also criticized the TSA's use of the SSI designation in an extensive report on "Pseudo Classification." In the statement for the Committee, EPIC also objected to the eye scanning of US travelers at US airports.
EPIC to Congress: Examine TSA Secrecy » (Mar. 2, 2017)
EPIC has sent a letter to the House Committee on Oversight for a hearing on the Transportation Security Administration. EPIC has objected to the TSA's refusal to release information designated as "sensitive security information" that is pertinent to EPIC's ongoing case against TSA regarding airport body scanners. EPIC said that "seeking to hide its decision making behind this cloak of secrecy." The House Committee has also criticized the agency's use of the SSI designation. EPIC also raised concerns about the eye scanning of US travelers at US airports as well as the TSA's statement that they will no longer accept drivers licenses from states that oppose "REAL ID".
EPIC Files Suit to Block "Invasive and Ineffective" Airport Body Scanner Program » (Sep. 27, 2016)
EPIC has filed the opening brief in EPIC v. TSA II with the federal appeals court in Washington, DC, challenging the Transportation Security Administration's continued use of body scanners in US airports. TSA issued a regulation mandating the use of body scanners across the country more than five years after the court in EPIC v. TSA ordered the agency to "promptly" solicit public comments on the controversial body scanners program and nearly a decade after the agency deployed the scanners without public comments. EPIC told the court that the TSA's regulation entrenches body scanners over more effective less intrusive screening techniques,  and undermines  the legal right of passengers to opt out. EPIC wrote that the TSA has failed to "justify the use of invasive screening techniques, or to provide the public with an opportunity to respond to the denial of the passenger opt-out right."
EPIC Sues TSA to Block Mandatory Body Scanners at US Airports » (May. 2, 2016)
EPIC has filed a lawsuit challenging the Transportation Security Administration's regulation for airport body scanners. The TSA announcement came nearly five years after a federal appeals court ordered the agency to "promptly" solicit public comments on the controversial screening procedure. Public comments overwhelmingly favored less invasive security screenings. But the TSA decided it may now mandate body scanners at US airports. In 2011, EPIC challenged the intrusive and ineffective TSA screening procedure. EPIC's new lawsuit challenges the regulation because it "denies passengers the right to opt out" of body scanner screening. EPIC also challenged the effectiveness of airport body scanners and the TSA's failure to recommend less invasive security screening.
TSA Releases New Body Scanner Document to EPIC » (Apr. 25, 2016)
In response to an EPIC FOIA request, the Transportation Security Administration has released a document describing the technical capabilities of the airport body scanners. EPIC previously obtained documents from TSA revealing that body scanners can record, store, and transmit digital strip search images of airline passengers. Last month, the TSA issued a regulation on airport body scanners, nearly five years after a federal appeals court ordered the agency to "promptly” undertake a rule making. In 2011, EPIC successfully challenged the TSA's unlawful deployment of airport body scanners. Despite public comments that overwhelmingly favor less invasive security screenings, the TSA plans to use invasive body scanners at US airports. The TSA also said it may mandate airport body scanners, even though the agency previously told the D.C. Circuit that the body scanner program was optional and the federal appeals court upheld the program, relying on the agency’s statements.
TSA Ignores Federal Court, Public Comments and Mandates Airport Body Scanners » (Mar. 2, 2016)
The Transportation Security Administration has issued a final rule on airport body scanners, nearly five years after the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the agency to "promptly" solicit public comments on the controversial scanners. In 2011, EPIC successfully challenged the TSA's unlawful deployment of airport body scanners. Despite public comments that overwhelmingly favor less invasive security screenings, the agency will continue to use invasive body scanners at airports. The agency also states that it may mandate airport body scanners. EPIC and 25 organizations have urged Congress to hold a hearing on TSA's decision to end the opt-out for airport body scanners. The agency previously informed the D.C. Circuit that the body scanner program was optional. The Court concluded because "any passenger may opt-out of AIT screening in favor of a patdown" there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment.
EPIC, Coalition Call for Congressional Hearings on Unlawful TSA Mandate for Body Scanners » (Jan. 13, 2016)
EPIC and 25 organizations have urged Congress to hold a hearing on TSA's decision to end the opt-out for airport body scanners. Dozens of organizations petitioned the DHS secretary in 2010 to solicit public comments on the original program. In EPIC v. DHS the lawsuit that followed, the D.C. Circuit ruled that TSA violated federal law when it installed body scanners in airports without public comment. The agency said at the time that the body scanner program was optional. The Court also concluded because "any passenger may opt-out of AIT screening in favor of a patdown" there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Ignoring Federal Law, TSA Drops Opt-Out Option for Body Scanners » (Dec. 19, 2015)
The TSA has used a "Privacy Impact Assessment Update" to announce an unlawful procedure for screening air travelers in the United States. The agency claims that it may "mandate body scanner screening for some passengers." In EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the screening was Constitutional because passengers could always opt out. As Judge Ginsburg explained, "any passenger may opt-out of AIT screening in favor of a patdown, which allows him to decide which of the two options for detecting a concealed, nonmetallic weapon or explosive is least invasive. "The TSA has also failed to "act promptly," as the Court mandated, to finalize the legal authority for the program.
TSA Continues Delay of Legal Authority for Airport Body Scanners » (Nov. 24, 2015)
The Transportation Security Administration is expected to issue a final rule on airport body scanners by March 3, 2016, nearly five years after the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the agency to "promptly" solicit pubic comments on the controversial scanners. In 2011, EPIC successful challenged the TSA's unlawful deployment of airport body scanners. Following EPIC's lawsuit, backscatter x-ray devices were removed from U.S. airports. Still, the agency continues to ignore public comments that overwhelmingly favor less invasive security screenings.
D.C. Circuit Orders TSA to Produce Schedule for Final Rule on Body Scanners » (Oct. 23, 2015)
The Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit today ordered TSA to comply with the ruling in EPIC v. DHS and conduct an "expeditious" rulemaking on the use of body scanners at airports. EPIC successfully sued TSA in 2011 to compel notice-and-comment rulemaking after the agency failed to solicit public comments as required by law. EPIC said the body scanner program was "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective." The backscatter x-ray devices were subsequently removed from U.S. airports, though the millimeter devices remain. In 2015 the Competitive Enterprise Institute filed a petition to compel TSA to issue a final rule as required by the EPIC v. DHS mandate. TSA now has 30 days to submit a rulemaking plan to the court.
Security Experts: EPIC Correct About Body Scanners-Invasive and Ineffective » (Aug. 22, 2014)
The first independent analysis of backscatter x-ray body scanners corroborate the claims EPIC and others have made for several years: The scanners are invasive and ineffective. In a detailed report published in 2005, EPIC warned that the x-ray body scanners amounted to a virtual strip search and were an ineffective means of airport security. Freedom of Information Act documents later obtained by EPIC revealed that TSA could disable the body scanner's privacy settings, the nude images could be stored on the machines, and the scanners ran on a standard operating system making them vulnerable to outside security threats. EPIC and a coalition of civil liberties organizations then petitioned DHS Secretary Napolitano to suspend the program. When the DHS failed to do so, EPIC sued the agency. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in EPIC v. DHS that the agency must begin a public rule making. The backscatter X-ray scanners were subsequently removed from US airports. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program) and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
Congress Investigates Airline Privacy Practices » (Aug. 20, 2014)
Senator John Rockefeller (D-WV) is currently seeking information from ten U.S. airlines concerning how airlines safeguard consumer traveler data. Senator Rockefeller has requested information regarding: (1) the type of information airlines collect; (2) airlines' data retention periods; (3) airline privacy and security safeguards governing consumer information; (4) whether consumers may access and amend their information; (5) whether airlines sell or disclose consumer information and if so, to whom do they disclose the consumer data; and (6) how airlines inform consumers about airline privacy policies governing consumer information. EPIC routinely urges the Department of Homeland Security to provide privacy protections for air travelers and end the agency's secret "risk-based" passenger profiling. For more information, see EPIC: Air Travel Privacy, EPIC: Passenger Profiling, EPIC: Secure Flight, and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
Senate to Hold Homeland Security Oversight Hearing » (Jun. 10, 2014)
The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold an oversight hearing for the Department of Homeland Security. Secretary Jeh Johnson will testify. EPIC has objected to many of the agency's mass surveillance practices, including the secret profiling of American air travelers, the use of drones for aerial surveillance, the amassing of information on Americans into "fusion centers", and the collection of biometric identifiers. EPIC has also warned that the DHS Chief Privacy Officer has failed to safeguard privacy, a legal obligation for that office. According to the DHS, the number of privacy complaints increased in 2013. EPIC has several Freedom of Information Act case pending against the DHS. In an earlier case, EPIC determined the DHS was monitoring social media and news organizations for criticisms of the agency. Another EPIC case led to the removal of the x-ray backscatter devices from US airports. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS - Social Media Monitoring and EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
EPIC Settles FOIA Case, Obtains Body Scanner Radiation Fact Sheets » (Jan. 10, 2014)
EPIC has received the documents that were the subject of EPIC's Freedom of Information Act appeal to the D.C. Circuit in EPIC v. DHS (Body Scanner FOIA Appeal). The agency had previously withheld test results, fact sheets, and estimates regarding the radiation risks of body scanners used to screen passengers at airports. EPIC challenged the lower court's determination that the factual material was "deliberative" and therefore exempt from the FOIA. After filing an opening brief to the D.C. Circuit, EPIC participated in a new appellate mediation program. As a result of the mediation, EPIC obtained not only the records sought, but also attorneys' fees. The fact sheets show that the agency did not perform a "quantitative analysis" of risks and benefits before implementing the body scanner program. EPIC addressed that concern in the 2011 lawsuit EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program). That EPIC case also had a favorable outcome, and ultimately resulted in the removal of backscatter x-ray scanners from US airports. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS - Body Scanner FOIA Appeal and EPIC v. DHS - Suspension of Body Scanner Program.
EPIC Appeals Secrecy of Body Scanner Radiation Documents » (Oct. 3, 2013)
EPIC has challenged a District Court decision which allowed two federal agencies to withhold documents about airport body scanners, including test results, fact sheets, and estimates regarding radiation risks. In the opening brief to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, EPIC argues that federal agencies may not withhold factual information under the "deliberative process privilege" in the Freedom of Information Act. EPIC said that under "under the standard adopted by the lower court, not only would the judgement of agency officials be exempt, but so too would reports or studies of any significance." For more information, see EPIC: DHS Body Scanner FOIA Appeal, EPIC v. DHS and EPIC v. TSA.
TSA Conducts Warrantless Searches Outside of Airports » (Aug. 8, 2013)
The Transportation Security Administration has expanded its Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) program to perform warrantless searches at various locations, including festivals, sporting events, and bus stations. The VIPR program uses "risk-based" profiling and "behavior detection" to search and detain individuals. Members of Congress have opposed these searches, and the GAO has questioned the validity of TSA's behavior detection and dispelled behavior detection effectiveness. Last year, EPIC prevailed in a lawsuit against the TSA that revealed the agency's plan to deploy body scanners outside of the airport at bus stations, train stations, and elsewhere. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Mobile Body Scanners FOIA Lawsuit).
EPIC Urges Federal Government to Stop Virtual Strip Searches in US Airports » (Jun. 25, 2013)
EPIC has submitted extensive comments opposing the TSA's decision to deploy body scanners in US airports. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals forced TSA to accept public comment on the controversial screening program following EPIC's lawsuit in EPIC v. DHS. In that case, EPIC successfully challenged the TSA's unlawful deployment of the body scanners which rendered images of air travelers stripped naked. More than 5,000 comments were submitted by the public, many on behalf of organizations and associations, and almost all opposed the agency's decision. EPIC's comments described the lack of adequate privacy safeguards for the backscatter x-ray scanners, the ineffectiveness of the devices, and the potential health risks to travelers. EPIC urged the agency to end the body scanner program and instead use noninvasive walk through metal detector and explosive trace detection devices. The agency has already removed hundreds of backscatter devices from US airports. EPIC brought the lawsuit after earlier EPIC FOIA lawsuits uncovered documents that revealed the devices were capable of storing and recording images of naked air travelers. For more information, see EPIC: Comment on the TSA Nude Body Scanner Proposal.
TSA "Unplugs, Boxes Up, and Ships Back" X-Ray Body Scanners » (May. 30, 2013)
The TSA has completed removal of the x-ray body scanners from US airports. The devices revealed detailed images of a person's naked body and have been described as "digital strip searches." The TSA action follows an Act of Congress and several lawsuits by EPIC. The TSA was forced to remove the machines after Congress required that the devices produce only generic image. And as result of EPIC v. TSA the TSA is currently required to accept public comments on its airport screening procedures. The public has until June 24, 2013 to voice its opinions. The millimeter wave devices remain in US airports. For more information, see: EPIC: Comment on the TSA Nude Body Scanner Proposal and EPIC: ATR lawsuit.
Backscatter x-ray machines show detailed images of a person's naked body and have been described as "digital strip searches."
Public Opposes TSA Nude Body Scanners » (Apr. 23, 2013)
Following a court mandate that the Transportation Security Administration receive public comment on airport body scanners, the public overwhelmingly opposes invasive nude body scanners. The court mandate was in response to EPIC's lawsuit in EPIC v. DHS, where EPIC successfully challenged the TSA's unlawful deployment of airport body scanners. The TSA will accept comments until June 24, 2013. The public has submitted almost 2,000 comments noting various problems with the scanners, including privacy violations, potential health risks, and the machine's inability to accurately detect threats. EPIC has recently filed appeals in two Freedom of Information Act cases seeking documents related to airport body scanner radiation risks and threat detection software. For more information, see EPIC: Comment on the TSA Nude Body Scanner Proposal, EPIC: Radiation Risks lawsuit, and EPIC: ATR lawsuit.
EPIC Appeals FOIA Decisions Concerning Body Scanner Information » (Apr. 16, 2013)
EPIC has filed appeals in two Freedom of Information Act cases seeking documents related to airport body scanners from the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration. EPIC filed FOIA requests with the agencies seeking records related to radiation risks from body scanners and the threat detection software the machines use. The TSA is currently developing formal rules for the use of body scanners in response to a court order in one of EPIC's previous cases. Body scanners allow routine digital strip searches of individuals who are not suspected of any crime. For more information, see EPIC: Radiation Risks lawsuit and EPIC: ATR lawsuit, and EPIC: Suspension of Body Scanner Program.
EPIC Obtains News Information on TSA Body Scanner Program » (Apr. 10, 2013)
The Transportation Security Administration was forced to disclose additional information regarding the Agency's controversial body scanner program after EPIC prevailed in a lawsuit against the Agency. In March 2013, Judge Royce Lamberth held that the Agency had unlawfully redacted certain information from records released to EPIC under the Freedom of Information Act containing details on software modifications made to the scanners. In response to a separate lawsuit filed against the Department of Homeland Security regarding the Agency's authority to deploy the devices, the TSA has initiated a process to allow the public to comment on the program. EPIC is recommending that the TSA adopt more effective screening procedures. For more information, see and EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
TSA Begins Court Ordered Rulemaking on Body Scanner Program, EPIC Urges Public Comment » (Mar. 26, 2013)
The TSA announced today that it will begin a public comment process on its airport screening procedures. The action follows from a 2011 court order in EPIC v. DHS. In that case, the Federal Appeals Court for the DC Circuit found that the agency unlawfully deployed body scanners in US airports. In a proposed two-sentence change to the agency's extensive regulations, the TSA seeks to grant itself authority to continue to deploy Nude Body Scanners ("NBS") without establishing privacy safeguards. EPIC, which brought the successful challenging to the TSA program, is urging public comment on the agency proposal. EPIC is recommending that the TSA adopt more effective screening procedures. If the TSA continues with Nude Body Scanner program, EPIC said the agency should make clear the right of individuals to opt-out as well as require privacy filters for all devices. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
EPIC Prevails in Two FOIA Cases, Obtains Further Details on Body Scanners » (Mar. 8, 2013)
A federal judge has granted EPIC victories in two Freedom of Information Act cases involving the controversial airport body scanners. Judge Royce Lamberth in Washington, DC held that the Department of Homeland Security must turn over two safety reports detailing radiation output by the scanners and a set of power point slides containing details on automated target recognition software. The agency previously claimed it was not required to release the documents to EPIC. EPIC has pursued several related Freedom of Information Act cases as a challenge to the deployment of the devices. In 2011, the DC Circuit of Appeals ruled in EPIC v. DHS that the agency must receive public comments on the decision to deploy body scanners for primary screening. For more information see: EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
EPIC Obtains DHS Body Scanner Training Manuals, New Questions About Absence of Privacy Safeguards » (Feb. 15, 2013)
In response to an EPIC FOIA request, the Department of Homeland Security has released documents about the use of body scanners by the US Secret Service. EPIC sought information about the types of images that body scanners capture, the length of time the images can be stored, and safeguards for maintaining the integrity and security of the captured images. EPIC also asked about radiation body scanner radiation risks. EPIC received the contract of sale between the Government and Rapiscan, the body scanner manufacturer; and the Secret Service’s training manuals for instructing new recruits on the operation of body scanners. The training materials make no mention of data privacy. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Body Scanners.
TSA to Pull Naked Body Scanners Out of US Airports » (Jan. 18, 2013)
The US Transportation Security Administration will end the contract for backscatter x-ray devices. As a consequence, all devices that produce a detailed naked image of air travelers will be removed from US airports. Beginning in 2005, EPIC and then a coalition of privacy advocates, scientists, legal experts and lawmakers urged the TSA not to deploy the devices. The groups petitioned DHS Secretary Napolitano to suspend the program pending a thorough review. The agency went forward and EPIC sued. In EPIC v. DHS, the DC Circuit held that the devices could be used as long as passengers were able to opt-out. The federal appeals court also ordered the agency to "promptly" begin a public rulemaking. That process will likely begin in March 2013. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Body Scanners.
National Academy of Sciences to Undertake Independent Assessment of Airport Body Scanners » (Dec. 19, 2012)
After years of pressure from political leaders, civil liberties and health advocates, including EPIC, there will be an independent review of the health risks posed by backscatter x-ray devices. A National Academy of Sciences committee will assess “whether exposures comply with applicable health and safety standards” for passengers and airport employees. The study is limited to radiation and safety testing, and will not examine the privacy implications or effectiveness of the x-ray machines. In 2012, both the House and the Senate introduced legislation calling for an independent assessment of the controversial devices. Europe has also effectively banned the use of backscatter X-ray devices. EPIC has a FOIA lawsuit against DHS concerning body scanner radiation risks. In response to another EPIC lawsuit, the agency will begin a public comment process on the airport screening program in March 2013. For more information see: EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners.
EPIC Urges Congress to Suspend Funding for Body Scanner Program » (Nov. 29, 2012)
In a letter to Representatives Mike Rogers and Shelia Jackson-Lee, EPIC has asked Congress to suspend funding for the airport body scanner program until the TSA has completed a court-ordered public rulemaking. The letter follows a House oversight hearing where members of Congress learned that the TSA had shipped millions of dollars worth of backscatter X-ray devices to warehouses. Earlier the TSA stated that it was moving the devices to smaller airports for efficiency reasons. Backscatter X-ray devices are currently prohibited in Europe. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program), EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners ("Backscatter" X-Ray and Millimeter Wave Screening) and EPIC: EPIC: Body Scanner FAQ.
Congress to Scrutinize TSA's "Scanner Shuffle" » (Nov. 14, 2012)
The House Subcommittee on Transportation Security is holding an oversight hearing this week, "TSA's Recent Scanner Shuffle: Real Strategy or Wasteful Smokescreen?" The hearing announcement follows a decision by the TSA to remove the backscatter x-ray devices from major US airports. In a statement for the record, EPIC highlighted public concerns about the use of body scanners, including health and privacy risks, and the failure of the TSA to take public comments on the program. In July 2011, the federal appeals court in Washington, DC ruled that that the Department of Homeland Security must "act promptly" to receive public comments. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program), EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners ("Backscatter" X-Ray and Millimeter Wave Screening) and EPIC: EPIC: Body Scanner FAQ.
TSA Unplugs, Boxes Up Airport Body Scanner X-ray Devices » (Oct. 19, 2012)
Earlier this year, the TSA indicated that it would no longer purchase backscatter x-ray devices for deployment in US airports. A news story this week confirms that the TSA has ceased buying the "Whole Body Imaging" devices and is actively replacing them with millimeter wave scanners, a less intrusive but also controversial scanning technology. EPIC sued the Department of Homeland Security to force disclosure of technical documents about the body scanner program. In a subsequent lawsuit, EPIC v. DHS, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals determined that air travellers have a right to opt-out of the body scanner screening and that the TSA must undertake a notice and comment rulemaking. In the most recent decision, the Court has ordered the agency to begin the public comment process by March 2013. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners and EPIC; EPIC v. DHS (suspension of airport body scanners).
Court Responds to EPIC Petition, Expects Body Scanner Rule by March 2013 » (Sep. 25, 2012)
The Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit has issued a ruling on EPIC's recent petition regarding the controversial body scanner program. EPIC had urged the court to require the Secretary of Homeland Security to begin a public comment process or suspend the program. The agency said it might "finalize documents" by February 2013. The court said it expected the agency to begin the process before the end of March 2013. In July 2011 the court ordered the agency to "promptly" begin the process. For more information, see: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
EPIC Prevails in Mobile Body Scanner FOIA Case » (Sep. 16, 2012)
A federal district court has awarded EPIC attorneys fees and costs in EPIC v. DHS, No, 11-945, a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that resulted in the disclosure of information about the agency's plan to deploy body scanners at bus stations, train stations, and elsewhere. The court found that EPIC had "substantially prevailed" in the FOIA lawsuit and that "EPIC has demonstrated a public benefit arising from the disclosed records." EPIC has several related FOIA lawsuits concerning new systems of mass surveillance. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (Mobile Body Scanners FOIA Lawsuit).
EPIC Pursues Body Scanner Case, Files Reply Brief » (Sep. 12, 2012)
EPIC has filed a reply brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in the airport body scanner case. The case arises from EPIC's Mandamus Petition, seeking to enforce the Court's July 2011 order requiring the DHS to "promptly" begin notice-and-comment rulemaking. EPIC has argued that the agency's ongoing delay is "unreasonable" and that the Court should require the Secretary to begin the rule making or suspend the program. For more information, see: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program) and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
New Congressional Report Recommends TSA Address Privacy and Health Concerns with Airport Bodyscanners » (Sep. 11, 2012)
"Rebuilding TSA into a Smarter, Leaner Organization," a new House Report critiques the Transportation Security Administration for "failing to meet taxpayers' expectations." The report, prepared by the House Committee on Homeland Security, recommends that the TSA sponsor "an independent analysis" of the health risks of body scanners and install privacy filters on all devices. The Report cites the decision in EPIC v. DHS, pointing out that the TSA has failed to abide by the ruling of a federal appeals court to "act promptly" to receive public comments. For more information, see EPIC v. Department of Homeland Security - Full Body Scanner Radiation Risks and EPIC v. TSA - Body Scanner Modifications (ATR).
EPIC Supreme Court Brief: Investigative Techniques are Not Infallible » (Aug. 30, 2012)
EPIC has filed an amicus brief with the US Supreme Court, arguing that new "investigative techniques should be subject to close scrutiny by the courts." EPIC submitted the brief in Florida v. Harris, a case involving a car search in response to an "alert" by a drug detection dog. The Florida Supreme Court held that a law enforcement agent relying on such an "alert" must produce evidence to support the reliability of the detection technique. Filing in support of the Florida decision, EPIC argued that new investigative techniques, such as terahertz scanners, airport body scanners, and digital intercept devices, raise similar concerns about reliability. EPIC described a growing consensus among legal scholars and technical experts about the need to improve the reliability of many forensic techniques.  "The 'perfect search,'" EPIC wrote, "like the 'infallible dog,' is a null set." For more information, see EPIC: Florida v. Harris and EPIC: Florida v. Jardines.
2012 Republican Platform Addresses Privacy and Government Surveillance » (Aug. 29, 2012)
The 2012 Republican Party Platform calls for strong Constitutional protections for privacy and new safeguards for personal data held by businesses. "We will ensure that personal data receives full constitutional protection from government overreach and that individuals retain the right to control the use of their data by third parties," the platform states. The platform also criticizes TSA screening procedures and calls for warrant requirements for most law enforcement-operated drones. However, other provisions endorse voter identification laws and increased disclosure of personal information to the government for cyber security. For more information, see EPIC: Privacy and Consumer Profiling, EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners, EPIC: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Drones, EPIC: Voter Photo ID and Privacy, and EPIC: Cybersecurity Privacy Practical Implications.
EPIC FOIA - Documents Shed Further Light on Homeland Security Pursuit of Crowd Surveillance » (Aug. 16, 2012)
New documents obtained by EPIC under the Freedom of Information Act provide further details on a DHS plan to use an multiples surveillance technologies to search people in public spaces. Previous EPIC FOIA work produced records about a similar DHS program, which the government agency subsequently claimed it had cancelled. However, the new documents obtained by EPIC show that the DHS was still pursuing mobile crowd surveillance as recently as 2011. The technologies include "intelligent video," backscatter x-ray, Millimeter Wave Radar, and Terahertz Wave, and could be deployed at subway platforms, sidewalks, sports arenas, and shopping malls. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Mobile Body Scanners FOIA Lawsuit) and EPIC: Electronic Frisking.
White House Pulls Down TSA Petition » (Aug. 9, 2012)
At approximately 11:30 am EDT, the White House removed a petition about the TSA airport screening procedures from the White House "We the People" website. About 22,500 of the 25,000 signatures necessary for a response from the Administration were obtained when the White House unexpectedly cut short the time period for the petition. The site also went down for "maintenance" following an article in Wired that sought support for the campaign.
White House TSA Petition Passes 20,000 Signatures » (Aug. 7, 2012)
A petition, posted at the White House website "We The People," urging the Transportation Security Agency to "Follow the Law!" has received more than 20,000 signatures. If 25,000 people sign the petition before August 9, 2012, the White House will respond.The petition asks President Obama to force the Transportation Security Administration to begin the public comment process on the controversial airport body scanner program, as the agency was ordered to do by a federal court more than a year ago. For more information see EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanners).
Court Orders Homeland Security to Answer EPIC's Petition » (Aug. 1, 2012)
The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit has ordered the DHS to respond to EPIC's mandamus petition to "enforce the court's mandate" by August 30. EPIC filed the "extraordinary writ" after a year had passed since the federal agency was ordered to begin a public rulemaking on the controversial airport body scanner program. A coalition of organizations, led by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, has filed an amicus brief in support of the EPIC petition and a separate petition to the White House has gathered more than 16,000 signatures. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (suspension of airport body scanners).
White House TSA Petition Passes 15,000 » (Jul. 23, 2012)
A petition posted at the White House website "We the People" urging the Transportation Security Agency to "Follow the Law!" has received more than 15,000 signatures. If 25,000 people sign the petition before August 9, 2012, the White House will respond. The petition asks President Obama to force the TSA to begin the public comment process on the controversial airport body scanner program, as the agency was ordered to do by a federal court more than a year ago. For more information see EPIC v. DHS (suspension of airport body scanners).
EPIC Demands Evidence of TSA Body Scanner Rulemaking » (Jul. 19, 2012)
EPIC has submitted a Freedom of Information Act request to the TSA, seeking documents about whether the agency actually intends to give the public the opportunity to comment on the controversial body scanner program. One year has passed since the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the agency to "act promptly" and undertake a public notice-and-comment rulemaking. The agency has not done so but claims to be working on it. In a separate Petition for Mandamus EPIC asked the Court to require the agency to issue a proposed rule within 60 days or suspend the program. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (airport body scanners).
EPIC Files Mandamus Petition to Compel Action on the Airport Body Scanner Program » (Jul. 17, 2012)
EPIC has filed a mandamus petition with the Federal Court of Appeals in Washington, DC to require the beginning of a public comment process on the controversial airport body scanner program. One year has passed since the Court ordered the Department of Homeland Security to "act promptly" to undertake the action demanded by EPIC, but the agency has taken no action. In the petition, EPIC said that the agency's delay poses risks to travelers, defies the Court's authority, and is unlawful. EPIC asked the court to require that the federal agency receive public comments within 60 days or that it suspend the program. (Mandamus Appendix). For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (airport body scanners).
Homeland Security Seeking Applicants to Join Privacy Board » (Jun. 28, 2012)
The Department of Homeland Security has announced that it is seeking applicants for the Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee. The Committee was established to advise the agency on issues related to personally identifiable information, data integrity, and other privacy-related matters. The agency has a mandate from Congress to ensure that its programs "do not erode privacy protections" and to ensure that personal information is "handled in full compliance with fair information practices as set out in the Privacy Act of 1974." For more information, see EPIC: Department of Homeland Security Chief Privacy Office and Privacy and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
Classified Report Finds Vulnerabilities in Body Scanner Program » (May. 4, 2012)
The Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General has completed an investigation into the effectiveness of the body scanner program as deployed in airports as a primary passenger screening system. The unclassified summary of the report notes that several vulnerabilities were found in the program, which has already cost more than $87 million. The full report consists of "Sensitive Security Information" (SSI) and will not be released to the public, according to the Inspector General. EPIC has challenged the SSI designation, arguing that it is an improper standard for classification. The Government Accountability Office, technical experts, Members of Congress, and bloggers have also questioned the effectiveness of the devices. In a federal lawsuit, EPIC challenged the body scanner program, calling it "invasive, unlawful, and ineffective." For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of body scanners).
House and Senate Call for Investigation on Airport Body Scanner Radiation Risks » (Mar. 15, 2012)
Both the House and the Senate introduced bills last month that would require the Department of Homeland Security "to contract with an independent laboratory to study the health effects of backscatter x-ray machines used at airline checkpoints operated by the Transportation Security Administration," and to provide improved notice of the health effects to airline passengers. The bills focus on the health effects of those screened by the backscatter x-ray machines, including frequent air travelers, flight crews, and individuals with greater sensitivity to radiation, such as children, pregnant women, the elderly, and cancer patients. In 2010, EPIC filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit asking a court to force the Department of Homeland Security to disclose documents about radiation testing results and agency fact sheets on radiation risks. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS - Full Body Scanner Radiation Risks.
EPIC Publishes 2012 FOIA Gallery » (Mar. 12, 2012)
In celebration of Sunshine Week, EPIC published the EPIC FOIA Gallery: 2012. The gallery highlights key documents obtained by EPIC in the past year, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation's watch list guidelines, records of the Department of Homeland Security's social media monitoring program, Google's first Privacy Compliance Report, records detailing the government's FAST scanning program, records of the FBI's surveillance of Wikileaks supporters, and DHS records detailing the use of body scanners at the U.S. border. EPIC regularly files Freedom of Information Act requests and pursues lawsuits to force disclosure of critical documents that impact privacy. EPIC also publishes the authoritative FOIA litigation manual. For more, see EPIC Open Government and EPIC Bookstore: FOIA.
Video, Blog Post Raise New Questions About Airport Body Scanners » (Mar. 9, 2012)
A popular video "How To Get Anything Through TSA Nude Body Scanners" show that it is easy to bypass airport body scanners by hiding materials perpendicular to the plane of the scanning devices. The video also notes that traditional metal detectors, now being removed from US airports, would routinely alert to the presence of metallic objects. Still more interesting may be the recent blog post by a 25-year FBI agent, expert in aviation security, who writes that the "TSA has never foiled a terrorist plot or stopped an attack on an airliner" and that "the entire TSA paradigm is flawed." In a federal lawsuit, EPIC challenged the TSA airport scanner program, calling it "invasive, unlawful, and ineffective." For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of body scanners).
2013 Federal Budget Limits Body Scanners, But Expands Domestic Surveillance » (Feb. 20, 2012)
According to White House budget documents and the Congressional Testimony of Secretary Napolitano, DHS will not purchase any new airport body scanners in 2013. However, the agency will expand a wide range of programs for monitoring and tracking individuals within the United States. This includes the development of biometric identification techniques for programs such as Secure Communities. DHS will also seek funding for "Einstein 3," a network intrusion detection program that enables surveillance of private networks. EPIC has urged the DHS to comply with the requirements of the federal Privacy Act, and is currently pursuing several Freedom of Information Act lawsuits against the agency. For more information see, EPIC - Body Scanners and Radiation Risks, EPIC - E-Verify, EPIC - Secure Communities, EPIC - Fusion Centers, EPIC - Drones, EPIC - Cybersecurity, EPIC - Secure Flight.
EPIC FOIA - New Details About Automated License Plate Readers Obtained » (Feb. 14, 2012)
In response to an EPIC Freedom of Information Act request, Customs and Border Protection has disclosed nearly 1,000 pages of documents on automated license plate readers and border body scanners. The documents include contracts with several companies, such as Rapiscan and L3, for vehicle and cargo screening x-ray devices. Previous documents obtained by EPIC revealed that the agency is developing integrated vehicle scanners, with backscatter x-ray, Closed Circuit Television, and automated license plate readers, that would be used with human subjects. Radiation experts have questioned the safety of these systems, which produce ionizing radiation. For more information see EPIC FOIA: Automated License Plate Readers and Border Checkpoint Body Scanners.
Supreme Court to Hear Case About Enhanced Search Techniques » (Jan. 6, 2012)
The US Supreme Court has decided to review Florida v. Jardines, a case that addresses whether a dog sniff at the front door of a home is a search that requires probable cause. This case follows Illinois v. Caballes, a 2005 case in which the Court held that a dog sniff around a car during a routine traffic stop was not a search. The Florida Supreme Court ruled that Caballes was inapplicable in the case, and that a dog sniff in front of a home is a Fourth Amendment search. This case also implicates the government's use of "enhanced" investigative techniques that are designed to detect contraband. Because these techniques are imperfect and also allow the government to search for material that is not illegal, EPIC has argued that a Fourth Amendment probable cause standard should apply. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Airport Body Scanners).
EPIC Urges Court to End DHS Delay in Seeking Public Input on Airport Body Scanners » (Dec. 23, 2011)
EPIC has asked a federal court seeking to enforce a July 15, 2011 order requiring the Department of Homeland Security to take public comment on the agency's controversial airport body scanner program. As a result of an EPIC lawsuit, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the agency violated federal law when it installed body scanners in airports for primary screening without first soliciting public input. In July, the Court ordered Homeland Security to "promptly" seek public comment, but the agency has failed to respond. EPIC, and a coalition of privacy and civil liberties organizations, first petitioned DHS to undertake a public rulemaking in 2009. This is EPIC's second motion to compel the agency to comply with the court's order. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
EPIC Asks Court to Require Release of Documents About Body Scanner Radiation Risks » (Dec. 5, 2011)
EPIC has filed a reply motion in EPIC v. DHS, No. 1:11-cv-01991-ABJ, a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit for information, held by the DHS, about the radiation risks of airport body scanners. EPIC is asking the court to force the agency to disclose documents about radiation testing results, agency fact sheets on radiation risks, and an image produced by the machines. A recent report from ProPublica states that the "U.S. Government Glossed Over Cancer Concerns As It Rolled Out Airport X-Ray," and the European Union recently prohibited the use of "back-scatter x-ray" devices in EU airports. EPIC has already obtained hundreds of pages of documents discussing the risks of radiation exposure. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS - Full Body Scanner Radiation Risks.
PBS Special Highlights Risks of Airport Body Scanners » (Dec. 1, 2011)
A PBS Newshour special highlights the radiation risks and security flaws of airport body scanners. The program follows EPIC's Freedom of Information Act lawsuits against the Department of Homeland Security. EPIC's suits forced disclosure of documents detailing the health risks and privacy hazards posed by the scanners as well as the proposed use of the scanners on public streets and in train stations. EPIC also sued the agency, asking the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to suspend the airport body scanner program. The court ruled that the TSA violated federal law when it installed body scanners in airports for primary screening across the country without first soliciting public comment. The European Union recently adopted strict guidelines that effectively prohibit the use of backscatter x-ray body scanners. For more, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology
Congress, Public Call for TSA Reform » (Nov. 18, 2011)
Republican Members of Congress have released "A Decade Later: A Call for TSA Reform," a staff report examining the effectiveness of the Transportation Security Administration, which was formed shortly after the September 11th attacks. The Report blasted the failure of the TSA to improve aviation security while spending billions dollars on ineffective equipment and programs including airport body scanners that are "easily thwarted." Over 30,800 people have signed a petition to the White House to abolish the TSA. The Obama Administration has promised to formally respond to any petition that receives 25,000 signatures (formerly 5,000). In a lawsuit filed by EPIC, a federal appellate court found that the TSA had violated the law by deploying full-body scanners at airports nationwide without first soliciting public comment. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners.
European Union Limits Use of Airport Body Scanners » (Nov. 14, 2011)
The European Union has adopted strict new guidelines limiting the use of body scanners at EU airports. Under the new guidelines, European Union member states may only deploy airport body scanners if they comply with new regulations that protect health, privacy, and fundamental rights. The European Commission has also prohibited any devices that store, record, or transfer images of travelers as well as devices that display an image of the naked human body. As a result, backscatter x-ray devices are now effectively prohibited in airports in the European Union. The European Commission has also made clear that passengers may not be required to go through body scanners, following the conclusion reached by the federal appellate court in the United States in the EPIC v. DHS case, which held that passengers have a legal right to opt-out of body scanners. The body scanners have not done well during trials in Europe. Most recently a test in Germany found that the devices were ineffective. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of the Body Scanner Program).
EPIC Asks Court to Require DHS Disclosure of Documents Detailing Body Scanner Radiation Risks » (Nov. 1, 2011)
EPIC has filed a motion for summary judgment in EPIC v. DHS, No. 1:11-cv-01991-ABJ, a pending Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for information about the radiation risks posed by body scanners. EPIC has asked the court to force the agency to disclose documents containing radiation testing results, agency fact sheets on body scanner radiation risks, and an image produced by the machines. A new report from ProPublica states that the "U.S. Government Glossed Over Cancer Concerns As It Rolled Out Airport X-Ray." EPIC has already obtained hundreds of pages of documents detailing the radiation risks presented by the machines. For more information, see EPIC: Body Scanners and Radiation Risks (FOIA).
EPIC Files Papers to End DHS Delay in Seeking Public Input on Airport Body Scanners » (Oct. 28, 2011)
EPIC filed papers in federal court today seeking to enforce an order that requires the Department of Homeland Security to detail the agency's controversial airport body scanner program. As a result of the EPIC lawsuit, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the agency violated federal law when it installed body scanners in airports for primary screening without first soliciting public comment. In July, the Court ordered Homeland Security to "promptly" seek public comment, but the agency has failed to respond. EPIC, and a coalition of privacy and civil liberties organizations, first petitioned DHS to undertake a public rulemaking in 2009. EPIC's subsequent lawsuit alleged that airport body scanners are "invasive, unlawful, and ineffective." For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
American Travelers to TSA: Body Scanners are Unsafe and Unacceptable » (Oct. 20, 2011)
EPIC has uncovered more complaints from travelers about the TSA airport body scanners. In response to a FOIA request, the federal agency turned over 241 pages of passenger complaints about body scanners to EPIC. The documents reveal that travelers are angry and frustrated about TSA screening procedures. Travelers expressed concern about radiation risks to children, the elderly, and those with special needs. Other travelers wrote the fact that the machines could capture naked images as unacceptable. One traveler said, "using [the full body scanners] is an extreme invasion of privacy." EPIC previously obtained hundreds of pages of complaints (sample) after filing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Agency. Earlier this year, in EPIC v. DHS, EPIC also obtained a judgment from the federal appeals court in Washington, requiring the TSA to conduct a public rulemaking on the program and ensuring that passengers have a right to opt-out. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
EPIC Asks Court to Require DHS Disclosure of Mobile Body Scanner Documents » (Sep. 22, 2011)
EPIC has filed a motion for summary judgment in EPIC v. DHS, No. 1:11-cv-00945-ABJ, a FOIA case against the Department of Homeland Security for information about the planned expansion of the body scanner program. EPIC has asked the court to force the agency to disclose documents containing communications with Rapiscan and other vendors about the deployment of mobile body scanners. EPIC has already obtained hundreds of pages of documents describing how the agency is exploring the use of body scanners on people who travel by train, attend sporting events, enter federal buildings, or travel along public highways. For more information, see: EPIC: Body Scanner Technology and EPIC: FOIA Note #20.
Citing Unreliability, Germany Rejects Airport Body Scanners » (Sep. 2, 2011)
After extensive testing, Germany has decided not to deploy body scanners at the nation's airports. Germany field-tested the scanners with more than 800,000 passengers over ten months and concluded the devices produced too many false alarms and were not effective. In an interview with ABC News EPIC’s John Verdi said, "when they can't distinguish between body sweat and explosives, they aren’t making anyone safer." Italy also recently removed the scanners from airports after the Italian Civil Aviation Authority concluded that they were inaccurate and inconvenient. EPIC has petitioned a federal appeals court to rehear the organization's challenge to the controversial program, citing erroneous findings that the devices would detect liquid and powdered explosive. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
Documents Reveal New Details About DHS Development of Mobile Body Scanners » (Aug. 31, 2011)
EPIC has obtained more than one hundred fifty pages of documents detailing the Department of Homeland Security’s development of mobile body scanners and other crowd surveillance technology. The documents were obtained as a result of a Freedom Information Act lawsuit brought by EPIC against the federal agency. According to the documents obtained by EPIC, vehicles equipped with mobile body scanners are designed to scan crowds and pedestrians on the street and can see through bags, clothing, and even other vehicles. The documents also reveal that the mobile backscatter machines cannot be American National Standards Institute “certified people scanners” because of the high level of radiation output and because subjects would not know they have been scanned. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of the Body Scanner Program).
EPIC Files for Rehearing in Airport Body Scanner Case » (Aug. 30, 2011)
Citing significant errors in an earlier decision, EPIC has petitioned a federal appeals court to rehear the organization's challenge to the TSA's controversial body scanner program. "The court overstated the effectiveness of the body scanner devices and understated the degree of the privacy intrusion to the travelling public," stated EPIC President Marc Rotenberg. EPIC's petition challenged the Court's finding that the devices detect “liquid and powders," which was never established and was not claimed by the government. EPIC also argued that the court wrongly concluded that the TSA is not subject to a federal privacy law that prohibits video voyeurism. The panel found that TSA body scanner employees are “engaged in law enforcement activity," contrary to the TSA's own regulations. EPIC is pursuing related litigation on the government's deployment of mobile body scanners. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS.
DHS Refuses to Disclose Details of Mobile Body Scanner Technology » (Aug. 17, 2011)
New documents released by the Department of Homeland Security to EPIC indicate the the agency continues to hide details about body scanners. In November 2010, EPIC filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the agency regarding the deployment of body scanners in surface transit and street-roving vans. In its latest document release the agency supplied several papers that were completely redacted. As a result of the agency's failure to comply with the Freedom of Information Act, EPIC has filed suit to force disclosure of the records. For more information, see: EPIC: Body Scanner Technology and EPIC: FOIA Note #20.
TSA Expands Behavioral Profiling at Boston Airport » (Aug. 3, 2011)
The Transportation Security Administration has begun training screeners at Logan International Airport in Boston to engage in behavioral profiling of air travelers. The program authorizes Transportation Security Officers to ask airline passengers personal questions concerning their travel plans and employment. Some travelers will be subjected to additional, invasive searches based on their responses. For more, see EPIC: Air Travel Privacy.
TSA Announces Installation of "Stick Figure" Software for Some Body Scanners » (Jul. 21, 2011)
The TSA has announced that it will begin installing software on millimeter wave body scanners that will display a generic stick figure on a computer monitor and not the naked bodies of individual air travelers. The TSA said this will address privacy concerns. However, there is no plan to install similar software on the more widely used backscatter x-ray devices. It is also still unclear whether t the body scanners are capable of capturing, storing, or transferring the underlying graphic naked image. Seeking to answer this question, EPIC filed a lawsuit, following the TSA's failure to provide an adequate response to EPIC's FOIA request. For more information see: EPIC: Body Scanner Technology.
Federal Appeals Court: TSA Violated Federal Law, Must Take Public Comment on Body Scanners » (Jul. 15, 2011)
As a result of a lawsuit brought by EPIC, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the TSA violated federal law when it installed body scanners in airports for primary screening across the country without first soliciting public comment. The Administrative Procedure Act requires federal agencies to provide notice and opportunity for comment when implementing a rule that affects the rights of the public. Writing for a unanimous court, Judge Ginsburg found there was "no justification for having failed to conduct a notice-and-comment rulemaking," and said, "few if any regulatory procedures impose directly and significantly upon so many members of the public." EPIC's brief alleged that airport body scanners are "invasive, unlawful, and ineffective," and that the TSA's deployment of the devices for primary screening violated the U.S. Constitution and several federal statutes. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology. Press Release.
European Parliament Takes Stance Against Airport Body Scanners » (Jul. 6, 2011)
The European Parliament has adopted a resolution that sets out strict safeguards for airport body scanners. The resolution requires that Member States only "deploy technology which is the least harmful for human health" and establish substantial privacy protection. The resolution prohibits the use of body scanners that use ionizing radiation. New guidelines also state that airport body scanners "must not have the capabilities to store or save data." EPIC currently is pursuing a lawsuit to suspend the use of body scanners in the United States, citing several federal laws and the US Constitution. EPIC has called the US airport body scanner program "invasive, ineffective, and unlawful." For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program) and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
EPIC v. DHS Lawsuit -- FOIA'd Documents Raise New Questions About Body Scanner Radiation Risks » (Jun. 24, 2011)
In a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, EPIC has just obtained documents concerning the radiation risks of TSA's airport body scanner program. The documents include agency emails, radiation studies, memoranda of agreement concerning radiation testing programs, and results of some radiation tests. One document set reveals that even after TSA employees identified cancer clusters possibly linked to radiation exposure, the agency failed to issue employees dosimeters - safety devices that could assess the level of radiation exposure. Another document indicates that the DHS mischaracterized the findings of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, stating that NIST "affirmed the safety" of full body scanners. The documents obtained by EPIC reveal that NIST disputed that characterization and stated that the Institute did not, in fact, test the devices. Also, a Johns Hopkins University study revealed that radiation zones around body scanners could exceed the "General Public Dose Limit." For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. Department of Homeland Security - Full Body Scanner Radiation Risks and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
House Passes Budget for TSA, Cuts Funding for Body Scanners » (Jun. 6, 2011)
The House has approved the 2012 budget for the Transportation Security Administration, cutting $270 million from the amount originally requested by the Agency. The cuts include $76 million that had been designated for the purchase of 275 airport body scanners. Leading lawmakers and activists have called attention to the health risks associated with the scanners, as well as their invasiveness. Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) criticized the machines as “slow” and “ineffective.” Later this month, the Campaign for Liberty will host a Ban the Scan rally in New York that will feature anti-TSA activist and former Miss USA, Susie Castillo. The Campaign is working to eliminate body scanners in New York city. Rep. Chaffetz and Ms. Castillo will be among those honored at EPIC’s Annual Champion of Freedom Awards. For More Information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS: Suspension of Body Scanner Program.
EPIC Files Suit for Details on Mobile Body Scanners » (May. 20, 2011)
EPIC has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security for unlawfully withholding documents concerning mobile body scanners. The mobile scanners can be used to monitor crowds, peering under clothes and inside bags. EPIC previously obtained documents describing the federal agency's plans to expand the use of these systems at railways, stadiums, and elsewhere. EPIC's suit asks a federal court to order disclosure of nearly 1,000 pages of additional records detailing the controversial program - records the agency has refused to make public. EPIC also has an ongoing lawsuit to suspend the controversial airport body scanner program. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS: Suspension of Body Scanner Program.
Congress Moves to Limit Funding for Airport Body Scanners » (May. 13, 2011)
A House Appropriations Subcommittee has stripped $76 m out of the TSA budget for 2012, designated for the purchase of 275 airport body scanners. Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said that the body scanners are "a nuisance. They’re slow. And they’re ineffective." Earlier this year, EPIC held a conference in Washington on "The Stripping of Freedom: A Careful Scan of the TSA Security Procedures." For more Information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology, EPIC: EPIC v. DHS: Suspension of Body Scanner Program, and EPIC: Spotlight on Surveillance.
EPIC Urges Court to Order Release of 2,000 Airport Body Scanner Images » (Mar. 25, 2011)
EPIC asked a federal court in Washington, DC to reconsider its earlier decision allowing the Department of Homeland Security to keep secret 2,000 airport body scanner images in EPIC's Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. The Court relied on a legal theory in its decision, "Exemption High b(2)," that was recently struck down by the Supreme Court in Navy v. Milner. In Milner, the Court held that FOIA exemption 2 only applies to records concerning employee relations and human resources issues. Milner overturns previous lower court decisions that applied the exemption to broader categories of records, allowing federal agencies to block disclosure of documents to the public. EPIC argues in its motion that the Department of Homeland Security is unlawfully withholding information about the airport scanners from the public. For more information, see EPIC-Milner v. Dept. of Navy and EPIC v. DHS - Body Scanners.
EPIC Urges Congress to Suspend Body Scanner Program, Require Public Comment Period » (Mar. 16, 2011)
In a hearing before the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, EPIC urged Congress to suspend the use of airport body scanners for primary screening. EPIC said the devices were not effective and were not minimally intrusive, as courts have required for airport searches. EPIC cited TSA documents obtained in EPIC's FOIA lawsuit which showed that the machines are designed to store and transfer images, and not designed to detect powdered explosives. EPIC was joined on the panel by radiation expert Dr. David Brenner, who has frequently pointed out the radiation risks created by these machines. The TSA, which is a federal agency funded by taxpayer dollars and responsible for the body scanner program, originally refused to testify at hearing. Eventually they showed up. Chairman Jason Chaffetz, who had previously sponsored a bill regarding body scanners, grilled the TSA officials and said the hearing would continue with more questions. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS.
EPIC to Testify at Congressional Hearing on TSA Body Scanner Program » (Mar. 10, 2011)
The Subcommittee on National Security of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will hold a hearing on "TSA Oversight: Whole Body Imaging" On March 16, 2011. EPIC President Marc Rotenberg has been asked to testify. The hearing is expected to explore the privacy impact, health concerns, and questions of effectiveness that have been raised about the program. Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) introduced legislation in 2009 that passed the House, 310-108, that would prevent the TSA from deploying body scanners as the primary screening technique in US airports. EPIC held a public conference earlier this that explored public objections to the TSA program. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
DHS: We Have the Authority to Routinely Strip-Search Air Travelers » (Mar. 10, 2011)
The Department of Homeland Security told a federal court that the agency believes it has the legal authority to strip search every air traveler. The agency made the claim at oral argument in EPIC's lawsuit to suspend the airport body scanner program. The agency also stated that it believed a mandatory strip search rule could be instituted without any public comment or rulemaking. EPIC President Marc Rotenberg urged the Washington, DC appeals court to suspend the body scanner program, noting that the devices are "uniquely intrusive" and ineffective. EPIC's opening brief in the case states that the Department of Homeland Security "has initiated the most sweeping, the most invasive, and the most unaccountable suspicionless search of American travelers in history," and that such a change in policy demands that the TSA conduct a notice-and-comment rule making process. The case is EPIC v. DHS, No. 10-1157. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
EPIC to Argue for Suspension of Airport Body Scanner Program in the DC Court of Appeals » (Mar. 8, 2011)
On March 10, 2011, EPIC President Marc Rotenberg will present arguments against the TSA body scanner program before the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. EPIC has said that body scanners are "invasive, unlawful, and ineffective," and that the TSA's deployment of the devices for primary screening violates the U.S. Constitution and several federal statutes. EPIC's opening brief states that the Department of Homeland Security "has initiated the most sweeping, the most invasive, and the most unaccountable suspicionless search of American travelers in history." EPIC has also cited the agency's failure to respond to the First EPIC Petition and the Second EPIC Petition, widely supported by a broad coalition of organizations, which challenged the deployment of the devices and called for a public rule making. The case is EPIC v. DHS, No. 10-1157. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
Inspector General Finds Homeland Security’s Contract Management Process Noncompetitive » (Mar. 2, 2011)
The Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security released a report finding that the agency's contract files did not "contain[] sufficient evidence of justification and approval, market research, and acquisition planning" for the $1.3 billion dollars in noncompetitive contracts the agency entered into in fiscal year 2010. The noncompetitive process raises doubts that the agency secured the "best possible value" for the goods and services and that the contracts were awarded to "eligible and qualified vendors." The IG recommended that the agency’s Chief Procurement Officer pursue corrective action plans. EPIC previously criticized the agency’s contracting practices regarding whole body scanners. For related information see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS: Body Scanners (Suspend the Program) and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (FOIA).
EPIC FOIA - Homeland Security Spending Millions on Mobile Strip Search Devices » (Mar. 2, 2011)
Documents obtained by EPIC under the Freedom of Information Act reveal that the Department of Homeland Security has spent millions of dollars on mobile body scanner technology that could be used at railways, stadiums, and elsewhere. EPIC has already challenged the use of the devices in airports, calling them "invasive, ineffective, and unconstitutional." According to the documents obtained by EPIC, the federal agency plans to expand the use of these systems to monitor crowds, peering under clothes and inside bags away from airports. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program) and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
White House Budget Funds Surveillance, Ignores Public Concerns » (Feb. 18, 2011)
The White House Office of Management and Budget has released the federal budget for fiscal year 2012. The stated goal of the budget is to reduce the national deficit by eliminating wasteful programs. However, the budget proposal includes funding for 275 airport body scanners, which EPIC has called "invasive, unlawful, and ineffective." There is funding for federal "fusion centers," widely viewed as unregulated government databases that are used to track people suspected of new crime. The White House budget proposes expansion of the “Secure Communities” program, which has been the target of harsh criticism by civil liberties groups. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program) and EPIC: Information Fusion Centers and Privacy.
EPIC Opposes TSA's Secret Evidence in Body Scanner Case » (Feb. 10, 2011)
EPIC has opposed an effort by the Transportation Security Administration to provide secret evidence to the court in EPIC's challenge to the the airport body scanner program. The TSA claimed that it can withhold documents that it has designated "Sensitive Security Information" and scientific studies because they are "copyrighted materials." EPIC responded that the TSA failed to establish that the documents are Sensitive Security Information, and also that the TSA cannot withhold materials in a judicial proceeding because they are subject copyright. The argument before the DC Circuit in the case is scheduled for March 10. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS: Body Scanners (Suspend the Program) and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (FOIA).
Senate Amendment Could End "Digital Strip Searches" » (Feb. 8, 2011)
Senator Udall (D-NM) has introduced a Senate Amendment 51 that would require the Transportation Security Administration to install "Automatic Target Recognition" software in all body scanners by January 1, 2012. The technology creates a "generic image" of airline passengers instead of the "peep show" images now produced by TSA devices and viewed by TSA officials. The TSA recently announced that it will begin testing new software at select U.S. airports. However, the TSA has not resolved concerns about image retention, health risks, or the effectiveness of the procedures. EPIC has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the TSA for unlawfully withholding information about the body scanner technology. EPIC has a case in Federal Appellate court to suspend the use of the devices for primary screening in airports. For more information see EPIC - Whole Body Imaging Technology, EPIC - EPIC v. DHS (Suspend the program), EPIC - EPIC v. DHS (FOIA).
EPIC Files Lawsuit for Details on New Passenger Screening Devices » (Feb. 2, 2011)
EPIC has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the TSA for unlawfully withholding documents about software modifications to the Full-Body Scanners. EPIC submitted requests for these documents in June 2010 and October 2010. In response to mounting public criticism about the passenger screening program, the TSA recently announced that it would use "Automatic Target Recognition" software to mask the nude images of airline travelers that TSA officials currently view. However, documents obtained by EPIC in an earlier Freedom of Information Act lawsuit established that these procedures have the capability to store and record unfiltered images of passengers. EPIC has since filed a lawsuit to suspend the controversial screening program. The new case is EPIC v. Dep't of Homeland Security, No. 1:11-cv-00290. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
TSA Drops Plan for Remote Viewing of Passengers, Will Get Up Front and Personal with New Scanning Devices » (Feb. 2, 2011)
In response to widespread public opposition to airport body scanners, the TSA has announced that it will begin testing new body scanner software at select U.S. airports that it claims is less revealing. But the new scanners will also allow TSA officials to observe the passengers as they are being scanned. Previously, TSA operators were stationed in a remote viewing room. The TSA has also not resolved concerns about image retention, health risks, or the effectiveness of the procedures. In June 2010, EPIC submitted a FOIA request for information about the technology. The agency has yet to respond. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
Court Grants Government Motion in EPIC Body Scanner FOIA Lawsuit » (Jan. 12, 2011)
A federal district court has granted the Department of Homeland Security's motion to conclude one of EPIC's Freedom of Information Act lawsuits. EPIC was seeking more than 2,000 images generated by airport body scanners held by the TSA. The DHS objected to the disclosure and the court sided with the government. The court relied on a legal theory, "Exemption High (b)(2)" that is currently under review by the Supreme Court in Milner v. Dept. of Navy. As a result of this lawsuit, EPIC obtained many documents concerning the airport screening program, including Procurement Specifications, Operational Requirements, traveler complaints, and vendor contracts with L3 and Rapiscan, that were subsequently made available to the public. EPIC may appeal the district court's decision as to the release of the body scanner images. For more information see EPIC:EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Body Scanners. (Press Release)
EPIC Conference Draws Broad Coalition in Opposition to Airport Body Scanners » (Jan. 6, 2011)
EPIC hosted "The Stripping of Freedom: A Careful Scan of TSA Security Procedures" at the Carnegie Institute for Science in Washington, DC. Speakers included Representative Rush Holt, Ralph Nader, New York City Councilman David Greenfield, and representatives of the Libertarian Party, the Council on American Islamic Relations, Flyer’s Rights, and the CATO Institute. The conference, covered by CSPAN, was fully interactive, with a videocast and a Twitter feed (#ScanTSA). For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
EPIC Files Brief in Airport Body Scanner Case » (Jan. 6, 2011)
EPIC has filed its reply brief in the suit to suspend the Department of Homeland Security's controversial airport body scanner program. The brief argues that "the TSA has acted outside of its regulatory authority and with profound disregard for the statutory and constitutional rights of air travelers, the agency’s rule should be set aside and further deployment of the body scanners should be suspended." EPIC filed its opening brief on November 1, 2010, arguing that the body scanners are "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective." On January 6, EPIC held a one-day public conference "The Stripping of Freedom: A Careful Scan of TSA Security Procedures" in Washington, DC. Oral argument will be heard in the case on March 10. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
DHS Files Brief in EPIC Airport Body Scanner Case » (Jan. 4, 2011)
The Department of Homeland Security has filed its answer brief in EPIC's suit to suspend the agency's controversial airport body scanner program. EPIC filed its opening brief on November 1, 2010, arguing that the body scanners are "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective." Since then, a national grassroots movement of citizens, advocates, and lawmakers staged protests, sent letters, held hearings (2), and introduced legislation (2, 3) to stop the program. DHS has repeatedly attempted to delay resolution of EPIC's lawsuit, but the Court has scheduled oral argument for March 10, 2011. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
Oral Argument Set in EPIC Lawsuit to Suspend Airport Body Scanners » (Dec. 21, 2010)
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has scheduled oral argument in EPIC's case, No. 10-1157, against the Department of Homeland Security. The court set a March 10, 2011 date for the parties to present oral argument before the Court. EPIC filed suit against the Department of Homeland Security to suspend the body scanner program because it is "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective." In its opening brief, EPIC argued that the federal agency has violated the Administrative Procedures Act, the Privacy Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, and the Fourth Amendment. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
Study: TSA Whole Body Scanners Ineffective at Detecting Explosives » (Dec. 14, 2010)
Evidence mounts that TSA’s whole-body scanners are not designed to detect powdered explosives or other low-density materials that pose a threat  to airline safety. Leon Kaufman and Joseph W. Carlson’s new study finds that “Even if exposure were to be increased significantly, normal anatomy would make a dangerous amount of plastic explosives with tapered edges difficult, if not impossible to detect.” Kaufman and Carlson’s study examined the imaging and device specifications of the backscatter machines to estimate the penetration and exposure to the body from the x-ray beam and the machines’ sensitivity to contraband. The authors’ study also echoes concerns about the health risks associated with the backscatter devices. EPIC has filed a lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security to suspend the body scanner program because it is "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective." For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
Court Finalizes Briefing Schedule in EPIC v. DHS Body Scanner Case » (Dec. 9, 2010)
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has finalized a briefing schedule in EPIC's case, No. 10-1157, against the Department of Homeland Security. The court has set a December 23, 2010 deadline for the agency's brief and a January 6, 2011 deadline for EPIC's reply. Final briefs will be due on January 27, 2011. EPIC has filed suit against the Department of Homeland Security to suspend the body scanner program because it is "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective." In its opening brief, EPIC argued that the federal agency has violated the Administrative Procedures Act, the Privacy Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, and the Fourth Amendment. For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
EPIC Demands Documents from DHS about Mobile Body Scanners, Use of Devices at Trains Stations and Stadiums » (Nov. 24, 2010)
EPIC has filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Homeland Security, demanding that the agency turn over documents concerning the use of body scanner technology by law enforcement agencies in surface transit and street-roaming vans. EPIC cited previous DHS testing of body scanners on New Jersey's PATH trains and the development of street-roaming backscatter vans. EPIC has also filed a lawsuit to suspend body scanner program. EPIC has called the devices "invasive, inefffective, and unlawful." For more information, see: EPIC: Whole Body Imaging and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS.
Majority of Americans Now Oppose Body Scanners and TSA Pat Downs » (Nov. 23, 2010)
A new poll by Zogby International finds that 61% of Americans polled between Nov. 19 and Nov. 22 oppose the use of full body scans and TSA pat downs.  Of those polled, 52% believe the enhanced security measures will not prevent terrorist activity, almost half (48%) say it is a violation of privacy rights, 33% say they should not have to go through enhanced security methods to get on an airplane, and 32% believe the full body scans and TSA pat downs to be sexual harassment. The Zogby Poll is the most recent survey of American opinion on the new airport screening procedures. Combined with earlier polls by USA Today and the Washington Post-ABC News, the Zogby Poll reflects declining support for the TSA program.
EPIC Releases Analysis on TSA Body Scanner Program - "Deployment and contracting for body scanners should be suspended" » (Nov. 22, 2010)
EPIC is making available to the public today the report EPIC prepared in January 2010, following the release of documents from the DHS in an open government lawsuit. The analysis, based on the internal records obtained from the agency, reveals that the "device specifications, set out by the TSA, include the ability to store, record, and transfer images, contrary to the representations made by the TSA...include hard disk storage, USB integration, and Ethernet connectivity that raise significant privacy and security concerns...include "super user" ("Level Z") status that allows the TSA itself to disable filters and to export raw images..." The EPIC memo states "Based on the materials received to date, EPIC concludes that further deployment and contracting for body scanners should be suspended until the privacy and security problems identified are adequately resolved." The documents were obtained in EPIC v. DHS (FOIA) EPIC has since filed papers in federal court to suspend the program. See EPIC v. DHS (body scanners).
Congress Raises New Questions About Airport Screening Procedures » (Nov. 21, 2010)
Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-MS) and Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), two leading members of Congress, have sent a letter to TSA Administrator John S. Pistole, objecting to the new airport screening procedures. Reps. Thompson and Lee wrote, "we are concerned about new enhanced pat down screening protocols and urge you to reconsider utilization of these protocols." Reps. Thompson and Lee further said that "the TSA should have had a conversation with the American public" and should have ensured that "these changes do not run afoul of privacy and civil liberties." EPIC has filed a lawsuit against the TSA for failing to provide an opportunity for public comment, which is required by law, and implementing a screening procedure that violates privacy. EPIC President Marc Rotenberg has called the new screening procedures "invasive, unlawful, and ineffective." For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS.
EPIC Files FOIA Suit to Force Disclosure of Body Scanner Radiation Risks » (Nov. 19, 2010)
EPIC has filed a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security, seeking records concerning radiation emissions and exposure associated with airport full body scanners. The Department recently implemented the scanners as a primary screening mechanism for all airline travelers. In August, many senators questioned the safety of the scanners. In September, Ralph Nader also sent a letter to the Senate expressing concern about radiation exposure. Earlier this year, EPIC requested DHS to release all information about radiation emissions. DHS failed to respond to EPIC's FOIA request and when DHS also failed to reply to EPIC's administrative appeal, EPIC filed a lawsuit in federal court. Earlier EPIC FOIA lawsuits uncovered evidence that body scanners can store and record images and that the Marshals Service had captured more than 35,000 images. For more information see, EPIC v. DHS (Body scanner images) and EPIC v. DOJ (Body scanner images).
Rep. Ron Paul Introduces Bill to Halt Body Scanner Program » (Nov. 18, 2010)
Representative Ron Paul introduced a bill that would hold TSA agents legally accountable for airline screening procedures. Rep. Paul cited abusive screening procedures as the reason for the legislation, titled the American Traveler Dignity Act. In a floor speech, Representative Paul also endorsed National Opt-Out Day, a grassroots movement of passengers who plan to refuse the devices on November 24th. EPIC is suing in federal court to suspend the body scanner program. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS.
New York City Moves to Ban Body Scanners » (Nov. 18, 2010)
Members of the New York City Council announced today that they would introduce legislation to ban the use of body scanners in New York City. Councilmember David Greenfield said, "I am deeply troubled that we are subjecting New Yorkers to this humiliating process, which breaches the most basic privacy rights." EPIC President Marc Rotenberg joined the Councilmembers on the steps of City Hall for the announcement. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
Senators Grill TSA Official About Airport Body Scanners » (Nov. 17, 2010)
In a hearing before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Sentors asked TSA Administrator John Pistole tough questions about the privacy and health implications of airport body scanners. Senators also asked about the invasiveness of pat-downs and the problems that the machines pose for religious objectors. Pistole failed to provide proof of independent studies regarding radiation risks and consistently downplayed privacy and religious concerns. EPIC has filed a lawsuit to suspend the body scanner program, calling the program "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective." For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
Senate to Hold Hearings on TSA, Congress to Examine Impact of Body Scanner Program on Airline Industry » (Nov. 15, 2010)
The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation will hold an oversight hearing on the Transportation Security Administration on November 17, 2010. Hon. John S. Pistole, the TSA Administrator, is expected to testify. EPIC has filed a lawsuit to suspend the body scanner program, calling it "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective." Opposition to the program is growing. The Libertarian Party, the American Pilots Association, Airline CEOs, flyers rights organizations, religious groups, and others are calling for an end to invasive searches at airports. A National Opt-Out Day is scheduled for November 24. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging and EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
Government Seeks to Exclude Religious Objectors from EPIC Body Scanner Challenge, EPIC Opposes DHS Motion » (Nov. 9, 2010)
In a motion filed in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, the Department of Homeland Security has attempted to exclude religious objector Nadhira Al-Khalili from EPIC's body scanner lawsuit. Ms. Al-Khalili is Legal Counsel for the Council on American Islamic Relations, one of the organizations that supported EPIC's petition, which is the basis for the challenge to the body scanner program. Ms. Al-Khalili's claims are based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and Islamic modesty requirements. EPIC has opposed the government's motion and stated that the agency is "simply afraid to have the Religious Freedom Restoration Act claims heard by this Court." EPIC further argued that "Respondents hope by seeking to exclude Ms. Al- Khalili . . . they will avoid judicial scrutiny of an agency practice that substantially burdens the free exercise of religion in violation of federal law." For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS (Emergency Stay, Body Scanners) and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
Libertarian Party Endorses EPIC Body Scanner Lawsuit » (Nov. 5, 2010)
Libertarian Party Chair Mark Hinkle said today, "The TSA should end the strip-search machine program immediately. We've reached a point where our government has no qualms about humiliating us." Mr. Hinkle expressed support for the EPIC lawsuit aimed at suspending the body scanner program. Mr. Hinkle further said, "We encourage Americans to call their newly-elected members of Congress and tell them that they don't want this expensive, worthless, intrusive, unconstitutional program." The Libertarian Party is America's third-largest political party. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS.
In Opening Brief, EPIC Urges Federal Appeals Court to Suspend Airport Body Scanner Program » (Nov. 1, 2010)
EPIC has filed the opening brief in EPIC v. DHS, No, 10-1157, a case that challenges the unilateral decision of the TSA to make body scanners the primary screening technique in U.S. airports. Three frequent air travelers are joining EPIC in the lawsuit: security expert Bruce Schneier, human rights activist Chip Pitts, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations legal counsel Nadhira Al-Khalili. The Petitioners have brought claims under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Privacy Act, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the Fourth Amendment. The Petitioners are seeking the suspension of the body scanner program. In its brief, EPIC argues that the Department of Homeland Security "has initiated the most sweeping, the most invasive, and the most unaccountable suspicionless search of American travelers in history." EPIC further argues that the Transportation Security Administration "must comply with relevant law, and it must not be permitted to engage in such a fundamental change in agency practice without providing the public the opportunity to express its views." For more information, see EPIC: EPIC v. DHS and EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology. UPDATE: Read EPIC's press release here.
Senator Collins Responds to EPIC's Request for Hearings on Airport Body Scanners » (Sep. 28, 2010)
Senator Susan Collins has sent a letter to EPIC Director Marc Rotenberg and consumer advocate Ralph Nader regarding airport body scanners. Senator Collins stated in the letter "I agree wholeheartedly that TSA must ensure that this new security technology is proven effective and comes with sufficient protections to the health and privacy of all persons." Mr. Rotenberg and Mr. Nader had sent Senator Collins a request for a public hearing about the security agency's body scanner program. The US Senate has not yet scheduled such a hearing, but leaders in the European Parliament will examine the issue of body scanners on October 6. EPIC will be participating in that hearing. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program) and EPIC - Airport Body Scanners.
Tests in Italy Raise New Questions About Airport Body Scanners » (Sep. 17, 2010)
Following field tests at international airports in Rome, Milan, Palermo, and Venice, the Italian civil aviation authority, has concluded that airport body scanners are inaccurate and inconvenient. Earlier this year the European Commission stated that body scanners have “raised several serious fundamental rights and health concerns,” and recommending less intrusive measures. The European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs has announced a hearing on the Body Scanner program for October 6, 2010. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program) and EPIC - Airport Body Scanners.
Ralph Nader and EPIC Urge Senate Hearings on Airport Body Scanners » (Sep. 7, 2010)
In letters to Senator Lieberman and Senator Collins, EPIC President Marc Rotenberg and consumer advocate Ralph Nader urged the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs to "convene a public hearing to review the government's deployment of whole-body scanners at passenger security checkpoints in US airports." The Nader/Rotenberg letter states that the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration have "disregarded serious questions concerning the devices' effectiveness, privacy safeguards, and potential health impacts." In a letter to the US Marshall Service, Senators Lieberman and Collins earlier expressed concern about the ability of these devices to store and retain images. The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs of the European Parliament has announced a hearing on the Body Scanner program for October 6, 2010. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program and EPIC - Airport Body Scanners
EPIC Challenge to Airport Body Scanner Program Moves Forward in Federal Court » (Sep. 2, 2010)
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has set a briefing schedule for EPIC v. DHS, No. 10-1157, EPIC's challenge to the airport body scanner program. EPIC has alleged that that the Department of Homeland Security has violated three federal laws (the Administrative Procedures Act, the Privacy Act, and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act) and that the body scanner search itself is unconstitutional, given what the courts have said about the permissible scope of airport screening procedures. EPIC's initial brief will be due November 1, 2010. Subsequent briefs from DHS and EPIC will be due by December 15, 2010. In earlier open government litigation against DHS, EPIC obtained evidence that the devices are designed to store and record images. For more information, see EPIC - EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
EPIC Presses for Release of Government Documents on Health Risks of Airport Body Scanners » (Aug. 30, 2010)
EPIC has filed an appeal with the Transportation Security Administration, challenging the agency's denial of expedited processing and fee waivers for an EPIC Freedom of Information Act request. EPIC's is seeking documents from the TSA concerning full body scanner radiation risks and testing. EPIC challenged the TSA's denial of expedited processing, arguing that by delaying to release of the records, the agency was risking the health of travelers and its own employees. EPIC also argued that the record request was particularly timely, as three US Senators recently wrote to the Department of Homeland Security about the safety of the airport body scanners and the risk to air travelers. Separately, EPIC has urged a federal court to suspend the program, pending an independent review of the health risks and privacy impact. For more information, see EPIC: Body Scanners and EPIC v. DHS (suspension of program).
Following EPIC FOIA Lawsuit, US Senators Raise Questions About Retention of Body Scanner Images » (Aug. 20, 2010)
The Chairman and Ranking Member of the Homeland Security Committee, along with four other Senators, have sent a letter to the head of the US Marshal Service to ask why the federal agency stored more than 35,000 images from whole body imaging scans taken at the Orlando federal courthouse. The letter follows a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, filed by EPIC, in which the Marshal Service was forced to disclose the fact that it had stored body scanner images. EPIC has also filed an emergency motion in federal court to suspend the program, pending a thorough review of the airport body scanner program. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
Senators Question Safety of Airport Body Scanners, Object to Program Expansion » (Aug. 18, 2010)
Three U.S. Senators have objected to the Department of Homeland Security's expansion of the airport body scanner program. In a letter to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, Senators Collins (R-ME), Burr (R-NC), and Coburn (R-OK) have asked "why the Department continues to purchase this technology when legitimate concerns about its safety appear to remain unanswered." The Senators noted that "the issue of radiation associated with the backscatter x-ray AIT machines has not been adequately addressed by TSA." They urged the agency's Chief Medical Officer, working with independent experts, to conduct a review of the health effects on travelers and airport personnel. EPIC recently submitted a FOIA request to the DHS for all records of tests conducted by the agency regarding radiation impacts. EPIC has also filed an emergency motion in federal court to suspend the program, pending an thorough review of the airport body scanner program. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC v. DHS (Suspension of Body Scanner Program).
EPIC FOIA - Feds Save Thousands of Body Scan Images » (Aug. 4, 2010)
In an open government lawsuit against the United States Marshals Service, EPIC has obtained more than one hundred images of undressed individuals entering federal courthouses. The images, which are routinely captured by the federal agency, prove that body scanning devices store and record images of individuals stripped naked. The 100 images are a small sample of more than 35,000 at issue in the EPIC lawsuit. EPIC has pursued a similar FOIA lawsuit against the Dept. of Homeland Security but the DHS refuses to release the images it has obtained. EPIC has also filed suit to stop the deployment of the machines in US airports. For more information, see EPIC Body Scanners, EPIC - EPIC v. DOJ (Marshall Service FOIA), and EPIC Press Release.
DHS Announces Dramatic Expansion of Airport Body Scanner Program » (Jul. 21, 2010)
On July 20, 2010, the Department of Homeland Security announced a substantial change in the deployment of body scanners in US airports. According to the DHS Secretary, the devices, which had once been part of a pilot program for seconary screening, will now be deployed in 28 additional airports. The devices are designed to capture and store photographic images of naked air travelers. EPIC has filed an emergency motion in federal court, urging the suspension of the program and citing violations of several federal statutes and the Fourth Amendment. Public opposition to the program is also growing. For more information, see EPIC v. DHS (Body scanners) and EPIC Body Scanners.
EPIC Pursues Lawsuit Against Homeland Security, Urges Court to Suspend Body Scanner Program » (Jul. 20, 2010)
Today, EPIC filed a reply in its case against the Department of Homeland Security, EPIC v. DHS,10-1157. EPIC had previously filed a petition and motion for emergency stay, asking the court to suspend the use of the machines. EPIC argued that the use of body scanners for primary screening in U.S. airports violates several federal laws and the Fourth Amendment. In its reply to the government's motion, EPIC also cited the growing public opposition to the program, the decision of major airports not to use body scanners, as well as the agency's failure to adequately address Constitutional concerns. For more information, see EPIC: Body Scanners and EPIC v. DHS.
EPIC Seeks DHS Records on Body Scanner Health Impacts » (Jul. 13, 2010)
Today EPIC filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Homeland Security for studies conducted by the agency and third parties concerning radiation and health testing of body scanners. The EPIC request follows a recent report by Dr. David Brenner to the Congressional Biomedical Caucus that radiation exposure may be up to twenty times greater than the DHS acknowledged. In April 2010, several  scientists urged Presidential Science Adviser Dr. John P. Holdren to conduct further evaluation of the health risks of body scanners. EPIC is pursuing FOIA litigation against the DHS regarding full body scanners, and has also filed a lawsuit to halt the use of the devices. For more information, see: EPIC: Body Scanners and EPIC v. DHS.
Full Body Scanner Bill Introduced in Senate » (Jul. 8, 2010)
Senators Klobuchar (D-MN) and Bennett (R-UT) have introduced a bill that would mandate the deployment of full body scanners in US airports. The bill would make Full Body Scanners the primary screening technique. The bill would provide for an alternative screening method for passengers with "privacy concerns." The bill contains particularly weak privacy provision that ignore many of the problems with the devices already uncovered. In 2008, the House passed legislation to prevent the use of body scanners as primary screening devices. Documents later obtained by EPIC established that the TSA required that Full Body Scanner have the ability to store, record, and transfer detailed images of naked air travelers. EPIC has recently filed suit against the Department of Homeland Security to require that the program be suspended, pending an independent review. For more information, see: EPIC: Body Scanners and EPIC v. DHS.
In Emergency Appeal, EPIC Urges Court to Suspend TSA's Full Body Scanner Program » (Jul. 2, 2010)
Today EPIC filed a petition for review and motion for an emergency stay, urging the District of Columbia Court of Appeals to suspend the TSA's full body scanner program. EPIC said that the program is "unlawful, invasive, and ineffective." EPIC argued that the federal agency has violated the Administrative Procedures Act, the Privacy Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the Fourth Amendment. EPIC cited the invasive nature of the devices, the TSA's disregard of public opinion, and the impact on religious freedom. EPIC, and more than two dozens organizations, previously petitioned the agency for a public rulemaking, which the TSA disregarded. EPIC has also testified in Congress about the problems with the body scanner program. Members of the Senate, Ralph Nader, and European officials have also expressed concern. The case is EPIC v. DHS, No. 10-1157. For more information, see EPIC: Body Scanners.
Report from European Commission Raises New Questions About Airport Body Scanners  » (Jun. 16, 2010)
A report prepared for the European Parliament and the European Council on the controversial proposal to deploy body scanners at European airports warns of "a serious risk of fragmenting fundamental rights of EU citizens, impeding their rights of free movement, and escalating their health concerns related to new security technologies." The report recommends common European standards to ensure the protection of fundamental rights and to address health concerns. The report also recommends security scanners that are less intrusive and pose fewer health risks than those currently deployed in US airports. Earlier this year, EPIC and Ralph Nader urged President Obama to suspend the airport body scanner program until "a comprehensive evaluation of the devices' effectiveness, health impacts, and privacy safeguards is completed by an independent board of review." For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging.
TSA Responds to EPIC and Privacy Groups, Claims Body Scanners Ok » (Jun. 1, 2010)
In a May 28, 2010 letter to a coalition of organizations, the Transportation Security Administration defended its use of full body scanner machines. The Agency claimed that the machines are safe, effective, and do not violate existing statutes or impermissibly infringe on Americans' Constitutional Rights. This letter is a response to an April 21, 2010 petition in which EPIC and 30 organizations urged the TSA to suspend the full body scanner program due to Constitutional, statutory, health, and effectiveness concerns. In 2009, the organizations petitioned the agency to undertake a formal request for public comments. The agency never acted on the request. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC v. Department of Homeland Security. 
Ralph Nader, Privacy Groups Urge Congress to Suspend Airport Body Scanner Program » (May. 28, 2010)
In two letters today, Ralph Nader and ten privacy organizations urged leaders in the House and Senate to cease deployment of full-body scanning devices in US airports until an independent review of the devices' health effects, effectiveness and privacy safeguards is completed. In letters addressed to Congressman Bennie Thompson and Senator Joe Lieberman, the organizations cited the increasing presence of the full-body scanner machines and the health risks posed by the machines. This message echoes previous requests made by EPIC in a letter to President Obama and in testimony before the House Committee on Homeland Security. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC v. Department of Homeland Security.
Coalition Petitions Homeland Security to Suspend Airport Body Scanners » (Apr. 21, 2010)
EPIC and a broad coalition of organizations sent a formal petition to the Department of Homeland Security to demand that the agency suspend the airport body scanner program. The petition states that the "uniquely intrusive search" is unreasonable and violates the Constitution. The petition further states the program fails to comply with several federal laws, including the Religious Freedom Restoration Act , the Privacy Act of 1974, and the Administrative Procedures Act. The petitioners also argue that the machines are ineffective and that there are better, less costly security technology. The petitioners  contend that the TSA has routinely misled the pubic about the ability of the devices to store and transmit detailed images of travelers' naked bodies. In a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, EPIC has already obtained technical documents, vendor contracts, and hundreds of traveler complaints. EPIC is seeking additional documents. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and EPIC: EPIC v. Department of Homeland Security.
EPIC v. Homeland Security: Government has Over 2,000 Photos from Airport Body Scanners » (Apr. 16, 2010)
As a result of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, EPIC has obtained hundreds of pages of documents from the Department of Homeland Security about the plan to deploy full body scanners in US airports. A letter to EPIC reveals that the government agency possesses about 2,000 body scanner photos from devices that the DHS said earlier "could not store or record images." EPIC has also obtained the most recent device procurement specifications, and several hundred new pages of traveler complaints. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging and EPIC: EPIC v. Department of Homeland Security. 
Senators Raise Privacy Concerns About Current Body Scanner Technology » (Apr. 14, 2010)
Three United States Senators have written a letter to Secretary Napolitano of the Department of Homeland Security, urging the Department to reconsider the whole body scanners currently planned for U.S. airports. Senators Collins (R-ME), Kyl (R-AZ), and Chambliss (R-GA) encouraged Secretary Napolitano to consider "auto-detection" devices instead of human screeners to address privacy concerns. The Senators noted that the current technology allows airport officials to "view detailed images of passengers’ bodies" and also that other systems could "save the government and airports money on physical space for screening." For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
No EU-US Agreement on Transfer of EU Financial Data to US or Deployment of Airport Body Scanners » (Apr. 9, 2010)
A meeting between top United States counter-terrorism officials and European counterparts ended in Madrid today with no agreement to restart a program that gave the US access to European financial data. The Terrorist Finance Tracking Program operated in secret from 2001 to 2006. European legislators objected to the program as a violation of EU privacy law. There also appeared to be no EU support for the further deployment of body scanners in European airports. EPIC has raised several objections to the body scanner program, including a letter with Ralph Nader to the administration, Congressional Testimony, and open government litigation, which revealed that the devices store and record images. For more information, see EPIC International Privacy Standards, EPIC Lisbon Treaty, EPIC Body Scanners.
TSA Concedes Body Scanners Store and Record Images » (Apr. 1, 2010)
In response to a Congressional inquiry, led by Congressman Bennie Thompson, the Transportation Security Agency acknowledged that images on body scanner machines would be recorded for "testing, training, and evaluation purposes." The TSA also did not dispute that test mode could be activated in airports, but said this "would" not happen. As part of an ongoing lawsuit, EPIC had previously obtained TSA documents describing the machines' capabilities to store and transmit detailed images of travelers' naked bodies. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
Coalition Urges President Obama to Suspend "Digital Strip Search" Program » (Mar. 26, 2010)
Civil liberties, consumer rights, air travel, and religious organizations have asked President Obama to "suspend the further deployment of body scanners in US airports." The organizations said that the scanners are "contributing to a negative perception of the United States" and noted the "sincerely held religious opposition to the digital undressing of air travelers by TSA officials." For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging, Stop Digital Strip Searches, and Privacy Coalition.
State Legislators Vote Against Body Scanners » (Mar. 23, 2010)
The Idaho House of Representatives has voted to limit use of digital strip search machines. The 58-9 vote sends Bill 573 to the Idaho Senate, which will vote on the anti-body scanner measure. The bill would bar body scanners as primary screening, require security officers to offer an alternative search, and mandate an independent investigation into the scanners' health risks. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Phil Hart, said “It’s my opinion that the use of these devices to screen every individual … would be an unreasonable search of those persons." For more, see EPIC Whole Body Imaging and EPIC Travel Privacy.
EPIC Recommends That Congress Suspend Body Scanning Program » (Mar. 18, 2010)
In testimony before the House Committee on Homeland Security, EPIC President Marc Rotenberg urged Congress to halt the plan to deploy body scanners in the nation's airports. "Based on the documents we've obtained, the views of experts, the concerns of  American, and the extraordinary cost, Congress should suspend the program," said Mr. Rotenberg. In a recent letter to President Obama, EPIC and Ralph Nader recommended an independent review to assess health impacts, privacy safeguards, and the actual effectiveness of the devices. Through FOIA litigation, EPIC has obtained technical specifications, vendor contracts, and hundreds of complaints from US air travelers about the body scanners (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5). A recent report from the GAO has also raised questions about the effectiveness and cost of the devices. For more information, see EPIC Whole Body Imaging and EPIC Air Travel Privacy.
EPIC to Testify in Congress on Airport Security » (Mar. 15, 2010)
EPIC has been asked to testify before the Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection on Wednesday, March 17, 2010. The hearing will examine "An Assessment of Checkpoint Security: Are Our Airports Keeping Passengers Safe?" EPIC is expected to discuss the documents it has recently obtained in an open government lawsuit against the DHS. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging.
EPIC v. DHS: EPIC Obtains Complaints About Airport Body Scanners » (Mar. 8, 2010)
In response to an EPIC Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) released more documents about body scanners in US airports. The documents include many complaints from travelers who went through the devices. Travelers reported that they were not told about the pat down alternative or that they were going to be subject to a body scan by TSA officials. Travelers also expressed concern about radiation risks to pregnant women and the image capture of young children without clothes. EPIC has previously obtained whole body imaging vendor contracts, operational requirements, and procurement specifications from TSA. EPIC and Ralph Nader have urged President Obama to suspend the program until an independent review is completed. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology. 
The GAO Calls for Further Analysis Before Deploying Whole Body Imaging Machines » (Mar. 1, 2010)
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently released a report regarding the deployment of body scanners. The GAO cited its 2009 recommendations to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA): that the TSA conduct operational tests to ensure that the whole body imaging machines are reliable, and the that TSA conduct an assessment of the whole body imaging machines' vulnerabilities. In its latest report, the GAO warned TSA of the importance of full operational tests, citing the puffer machine debacle as an example of the government waste that results from insufficient operational testing. The GAO also expressed concern over TSA's lack of complete risk assessments and inability to "provide documentation to show how they have addressed the concerns raised in the 2009 GAO report regarding the susceptibility of the technology to terrorist tactics."  Because of this, the GAO concluded that it is unclear whether the body scanners or other technologies would have detected the weapon used in the December 25 attempted attack. For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology and Body Scanners.
Ralph Nader and EPIC's Marc Rotenberg Urge President Obama to Suspend Whole Body Scanning Program » (Feb. 24, 2010)
In a letter to the White House, consumer advocate Ralph Nader and EPIC President Marc Rotenberg have asked President Obama to suspend the deployment of body imaging devices until "a comprehensive evaluation of the devices' effectiveness, health impacts, and privacy safeguards is completed by an independent board of review." Mr. Nader and Mr. Rotenberg point to a recent workshop at which experts noted that the devices are ineffective, that health risks have not been assessed, and that the TSA has misrepresented the privacy safeguards. They also said that air travelers subject to secondary screening who are actually familiar with the capabilities of body scanners would prefer a pat-down search to a body scan for both privacy and religious reasons. European governments are currently undertaking a three-month review of the body scanner proposal. For more information see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging.
EPIC and Ralph Nader Host Event on Body Scanners » (Feb. 19, 2010)
Today the Center for the Study of Responsive Law (CSRL) and EPIC hosted an event: “Airport Body Scanners Under the Microscope: Not Such a Pretty Picture.” The event featured keynote speeches by Ralph Nader and Marc Rotenberg, president of EPIC. The event also included two panels, the first of which focused on the problems with body scanners, and the second of which dealt with the political opportunities that exist to combat the widespread utilization of the scanners. The event included talks by experts on radiation, airport security, religious and constitutional ramifications of whole body imaging, and the international response to whole body imaging machines. EPIC Staff Counsel, Ginger McCall, discussed documents that EPIC recently received that reveal that the machines can store and transmit images. Katitiza Rodriguez, director of EPIC’s International Privacy Project, discussed the EU’s decision to postpone the use of these machines until a full privacy and health risk assessment can be completed. For more information see: EPIC: Whole Body Imaging.
Federal Budget Announced for Fiscal Year 2011, Surveillance Projects Scrutinized » (Feb. 3, 2010)
The Office of Management and Budget has released the federal budget for fiscal year 2011. The budget proposes funding for several new surveillance initiatives, including over $700 million to the Department of Homeland Security for "Passenger Aviation Security". The Department would like to purchase 500 body scanner machines for U.S. airports, bringing the projected total number of machines to 1,000 at a cost of over $200 million by the end of 2011. The new budget also includes several hundred million dollars for the Department of Justice's national security programs, which were recently the subject of a critical Inspector-General's report for improper use of authority. For more information, see EPIC DHS and Privacy, EPIC Domestic Surveillance, EPIC Air Travel Privacy, and EPIC Whole Body Imaging.
EPIC Urges Increased Privacy for "Global Entry" Registered Traveler Program » (Jan. 28, 2010)
On January 19, EPIC filed comments with the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), urging the agency to “to revise its establishment of the Global Entry program and to reconsider the privacy and security implications of the program.” CBP proposed to make permanent the Global Entry program, under which pre-registered international travelers can bypass conventional security lines by scanning their passports and fingerprints at a kiosk, answering customs declaration questions, and then presenting a receipt to Customs officials. EPIC urged CBP to ensure that Global Entry complied with the Privacy Act and to conduct a separate Privacy Impact Assessment. Those measures are particularly pressing in light of recent problems, including data breaches and bankruptcy, experienced by “Clear,” a similar registered traveler program. In 2005, EPIC testified before Congress that the absence of Privacy Act safeguards for registered traveler programs would jeopardize air traveler privacy and security. For more information, see EPIC Global Entry, EPIC Air Travel Privacy, EPIC Biometric Identifiers, EPIC Automated Targeting System, and EPIC Whole Body Imaging.
European Union Rejects US Demands on Body Scanners » (Jan. 21, 2010)
EU President Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba announced today that European countries would not rush to install body scanners as the United States has urged. He said that there will first be studies to determine whether the devices "are effective, do not harm health, and do not violate privacy." The European countries have agreed that they will adopt a unified position on the body scanner proposal. European Minister Viviane Reding stated that "Europe's need for security cannot justify an invasion of privacy. Our citizens are not objects: they are human beings." Previous post-9/11 disputes between the US and the EU have involved the transfer of Passenger Name Records and financial information. The European position in the current dispute is strengthened by the recent adoption of the Lisbon Treaty and the entry into force of the Charter of Fundmental Rights. EPIC has scheduled a press conference at the National Press Club on January 25 on "Body Scanners and Privacy.” For more information, see EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology.
Congress Begins Hearings on the "Trouser Bomber" and Intelligence Reform » (Jan. 20, 2010)
The Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security opened hearings today on airline security and the intelligence failure on December 25. Questions about privacy and civil liberties were raised frequently by senators. Specifically, senators asked about the adequacy of privacy safeguards for the body scanners, database profiling, biometric identification, and the status of the President's Civil Liberties and Privacy Oversight Board. According to documents obtained by EPIC through a Freedom of Information Act request, the body scanners ordered by the TSA are designed to store and record images of American air travelers. EPIC has scheduled a press conference at the National Press Club on January 25 on "Body Scanners and Privacy.”
TSA Responds to Whole Body Imaging Objections » (Jun. 23, 2009)
The Transportation Security Administration has replied to the Privacy Coalition statement on whole body imaging systems. The agency claims that the Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) provides adequate protection. The Privacy Coalition letter pointed out that "the devices are designed to capture, record, and store detailed images of individuals undressed" and said that "If the public understood this, they would be outraged by the use of these devices by the US government on US citizens." The Privacy Coalition said that the use of the devices should be suspended pending an investigation. The letter was prompted by the TSA's announcement that Whole Body Imaging would replace metal detectors as the primary screening technique at US airports. The House of Representatives recently passed legislation that would establish clear privacy safeguards for the devices. See also EPIC's page on Whole Body Imaging.
EPIC Urges Homeland Security to Stop Digital Strip-Searches » (Jun. 2, 2009)
EPIC sent a letter to the Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, urging the suspension of the Whole Body Imaging program. The devices would capture detailed naked images of all passengers at US airports. EPIC and thirty organizations asked Napolitano to begin a formal rulemaking and investigate less invasive means of screening. EPIC has also launched a campaign and established a Facebook Group to stop the program. See EPIC's Backscatter X-ray, Whole Body Imaging, and Air Travel Privacy pages.
EPIC Launches Campaign to Suspend 'Whole Body Imaging' at Nation's Airports » (May. 18, 2009)
EPIC announced a national campaign today to suspend the use of "Whole Body Imaging" -- devices that photograph American air travellers stripped naked in US airports. The campaign responds to a policy reversal by the TSA which would now make the the "virtual strip search" mandatory, instead of voluntary as originally announced. EPIC and others say that there are inadequate safeguards to prevent the misuse of the images. They are asking Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to suspend the program and to allow for public comment. For more information, see EPIC's Backscatter X-ray, Whole Body Imaging page.

Background

In 2005, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), began testing passenger imaging technology--called "whole body imaging," "body scanners," "full body scanners," and "advanced imaging technology"--to screen air travelers. Body scanners produce detailed, three-dimensional images of individuals. Security experts have described body scanners as the equivalent of "a physically invasive strip-search." The agency uses body scanners for primary passenger screening at airports throughout the United States.

As part of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, EPIC obtained documents which establish that the TSA required the machines to be capable of storing, recording, and transferring detailed images of naked air travelers. EPIC also obtained hundreds of pages of traveler complaints, which described the invasive program and the lack of proper signage and information regarding the machines. The complaints establish the agency had been denying air travelers alternative screening opportunities.

The images captured by body scanner devices can uniquely identify individual air travelers. The TSA uses body scanners to search air travelers as they pass through the TSA's airport security checkpoints. The TSA began using body scanners for primary screening in 2009.

EPIC's 2010 Lawsuit

On July 2, 2010, EPIC sued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, challenging the TSA's unilateral decision to make body scanners the primary screening technique in U.S. airports. Three frequent air travelers joined EPIC in the lawsuit: security expert Bruce Schneier, human rights activist Chip Pitts, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations Legal Counsel Nadhira Al-Khalili. The Petitioners brought claims under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Privacy Act, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the Fourth Amendment. EPIC sought the suspension of the body scanner program, pending independent review and public notice and comment rulemaking.

EPIC petitioned the D.C. Circuit for review of three DHS actions: one failure to act, one agency Order, and one agency Rule of the TSA, a DHS component. The Petitioners filed a motion for emergency stay, urging the Court to shut down the program as soon as possible in order to prevent irreparable harm to American travelers. On July 15, 2010, the DHS filed a brief in opposition to EPIC's motion. On July 20, 2010, EPIC filed a reply to the opposition. On September 1, 2010, the Court ordered the motion be denied, and set out the briefing schedule.

On November 1, 2010, EPIC filed its opening brief, arguing that the DHS "has initiated the most sweeping, the most invasive, and the most unaccountable suspicionless search of American travelers in history." EPIC further argued that the agency "must comply with relevant law, and it must not be permitted to engage in such a fundamental change in agency practice without providing the public the opportunity to express its views."

On November 5, 2010, the DHS moved to exclude religious objector Nadhira Al-Khalili from the lawsuit. Ms. Al-Khalili was Legal Counsel for the Council on American Islamic Relations, one of the organizations that supported EPIC's petition, which was the basis for the challenge to the body scanner program. Ms. Al-Khalili's claims were based on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and Islamic modesty requirements. EPIC opposed the government's motion and stated that the agency is "simply afraid to have the Religious Freedom Restoration Act claims heard by this Court." EPIC further argued that "Respondents hope by seeking to exclude Ms. Al- Khalili . . . they will avoid judicial scrutiny of an agency practice that substantially burdens the free exercise of religion in violation of federal law."

On December 23, 2010, DHS filed an answer brief, again urging the Court to exclude Nadhira al-Khalili as a religious objector in the suit. Respondents also asserted that the body scanner program was not substantial enough of a change in agency policy to constitute a "rule" under the Administrative Procedures Act. EPIC previously argued that the body scanner program was "the single most significant change in air traveler screening in the United States since the creation of the agency," adding that the agency has considered far less significant changes to be rules, including policies relating to butane lighters and transportation worker identity documents.

On January 6, 2011, EPIC filed a reply brief, arguing that "the TSA has acted outside of its regulatory authority and with profound disregard for the statutory and constitutional rights of air travelers, the agency's rule should be set aside and further deployment of the body scanners should be suspended." On the same day, EPIC hosted a one-day public conference "The Stripping of Freedom: A Careful Scan of TSA Security Procedures" in Washington, DC.

The D.C. Circuit held oral argument in the case was held on March 10, 2011. The court issued its opinion on July 15, 2011, ruling for EPIC on the APA claim and ordering the agency to promptly conduct notice-and-comment rulemaking.

EPIC's 2016 Lawsuit

On May 2, 2016, EPIC filed a petition for review of the TSA's final body scanner rule: 81 Fed. Reg. 11,364 (Mar. 3, 2016). The case was consolidated with another petition filed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The agency initially filed a motion for leave to file portions of the administrative record ex parte and under seal, which EPIC opposed in part. EPIC and CEI filed initial briefs at the end of September 2016. A group of civil rights organizations filed an amicus brief in support of EPIC and CEI in October 2016. The Government filed its respondent brief in November 2016, and EPIC filed the reply brief in December 2016. The D.C. Circuit scheduled oral argument for April 7, 2017. Legal documents are available here.

Litigation Documents

EPIC v. DHS, 653 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (Case No. 10-1157 filed July 2, 2010)

• D.C. Circuit Opinion, EPIC v. DHS, 653 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2011)
• EPIC's Opening Brief
• EPIC's Motion for Emergency Stay(pdf)
• EPIC's Petition for Review(pdf)
• Exhibit 1: EPIC: Petition to the DHS Regarding Body Scanners, May 31, 2009
• Exhibit 2: TSA: Letter to EPIC, June 19, 2009
• Exhibit 3: EPIC: Petition to DHS Regarding Body Scanners, April 21, 2010
• Exhibit 4: TSA: Letter to EPIC, May 28, 2010
• Declaration of Petitioner Bruce Schneier
• Department of Homeland Security's Opposition to EPIC's Emergency Motion(pdf)
• Exhibit 1: Privacy Impact Assessment, January 2, 2008
• Exhibit 2: Privacy Impact Assessment, July 23, 2009
• Exhibit 3: Privacy Impact Assessment, August 17, 2008
• Exhibit 4: Backscatter Sign
• Exhibit 5: Millimeter Wave Sign
• EPIC's Reply(pdf)
• Exhibit 1: Image from Body Scanner Machine
• Exhibit 2: USA Today: Backlash Grows Against Full Body Scanners in Airports
• Exhibit 3: TSA Operational Requirements
• Exhibit 4: TSA: Procurement Specifications
• DHS's Motion to Exclude Religious Objector Nadhira Al-Khalili As a Party
• EPIC's Opposition to Department's Motion to Exclude
• EPIC's Reply Brief
• DHS's Opposition Brief
• EPIC's Motion to Enforce the Court's Mandate
• Department of Homeland Security's Opposition to EPIC's Motion to Enforce
• DC Circuit Per Curiam Order Denying EPIC's Motion to Enforce
• EPIC's Second Motion to Enforce the Court's Mandate
• DHS' Opposition to EPIC's Second Motion to Enforce
• EPIC's Petition for Writ of Mandamus
• Amicus Brief by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, et. al.
• DC Circuit Mandamus Briefing Order
• DHS' Response in Opposition to EPIC's Petition
• Declaration of John P. Sammon in Support of DHS' Response
• EPIC's Reply to DHS' Response in Opposition to EPIC's Petition
• DC Circuit Mandamus Order

EPIC v. TSA, Case No. 16-1139 (D.C. Cir. filed May 2, 2016)

• Judgment and Memorandum Opinion (May. 26, 2017)
• Briefs
• EPIC Opening Brief (Sept. 26, 2016)
• CEI Opening Brief (Sept. 26, 2016)
• Freedom to Travel USA Amicus Brief (Oct. 3, 2016)
• TSA Respondent Brief (Nov. 21, 2016)
• CEI Reply Brief (Dec. 13, 2017)
• EPIC Reply Brief (Dec. 14, 2017)
• Other Documents
• Supplemental Appendix (Mar. 27, 2017)
• Joint Appendix (Dec. 15, 2016)
• Per Curiam Order re: TSA Motion to Seal (Nov. 9, 2016)
• TSA Reply in Support of Motion to File Ex Parte (Oct. 7, 2016)
• EPIC's Opposition to the TSA's Motion to File Ex Parte (Oct. 3, 2016)
• TSA Motion to File Portions of the Administrative Record Under Seal and Portions Ex Parte and Under Seal (Sept. 19, 2016)
• Clerk's Order re: Initial Submissions (May 6, 2016)
• Petition for Review (May 2, 2016)

Passenger Screening Using Advanced Imaging Technology, TSA Docket No. 2013-0004

• Docket
• Final Rule, 81 Fed. Reg. 11,364 (March 3, 2016)
• Final Rule, Regulatory Impact Analysis
• Final Rule, Footnotes (Part 1 of 2)
• Final Rule, Footnotes (Part 2 of 2)
• Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 78 Fed. Reg. 18,287 (March 26, 2013)

Body Scanner Resources

• EPIC: Whole Body Imaging Technology (Body Scanners)
• Spotlight on Surveillance, Body Scanners
• EPIC v. DHS (FOIA, Body Scanners)
• EPIC: Comments on TSA Body Scanner Program

News Stories

• What the TSA's New Body-scanner Rules Mean For You, Washington Post (Dec. 31, 2015)
• TSA Challenges Body Scan Lawsuit, Forbes (Dec. 29, 2015)
• TSA Fails to Comply With Year-Old ‘Nude’ Body-Scanner Court Order, David Kravets, July 16, 2012.
• Editorial: TSA Defies the Courts, The Washington Times, July 18, 2012.
• One Year Later and No Hearings on Body Scanners, Maryam K. Ansari, Esq., FindLaw, July 18, 2012.
• Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Air Travelers’ “Bill of Rights”, Richard Simon, L.A. Times, June 19, 2012.
• TSA’s New Scanner Technology Questioned, Jessica Meyers, Politico, June 19, 2012.
• TSA Full-body Scanners at Airports Pose Little Risk, Study Finds, Hugo Martin, L.A. Times, June 10, 2012.
• Homeland Security Concedes Airport Body Scanner ‘Vulnerabilities’, David Kravets, Wired, May 7, 2012.
• GOP Report: TSA Hasn’t Improved Aviation Security, Ashley Halsey III, Washington Post, November 16, 2011.
• Airport Body Scanners Were Improperly Adopted by U.S., Appeals Court Rules, Tom Schoenberg and Puneet Kollipara, Bloomberg News, July 15, 2011.
• Airport Body Scans Can Continue While U.S. Seeks Comments, Tom Schoenberg and Puneet Kollipara, BusinessWeek, July 15, 2011.
• Federal Court OKs Controversial Full Body Scans, Orders Public Review, Mike M. Ahlers, CNN, July 15, 2011.
• TSA Admits Bungling of Airport Body-Scanner Radiation Tests, David Kravets, Wired, March 15, 2011.
• Homeland Security Looked Into Covert Body Scans, Thomas Frank, USA Today, March 4, 2011.
• DHS Denies Plans for Expanded Use of Body Scanners, Jaikumar Vijayan, Computerworld, March 3, 2011.
• Harvard Students Challenge TSA, Katie Johnston Chase, Boston.com, December 2, 2010
• Are TSA Tactics Constitutional? An Advocacy Group Sues to Find Out, Howard Portnoy, Hot Air, November 29, 2010.
• The TSA Is Invasive, Annoying, and Unconstitutional, Jeffrey Rosen, Washington Post, November 28, 2010.
• Administration to Seek Balance in Airport Screening, Scott Shane, New York Times, November 21, 2010.
• Protest Over Airport Body Scanners, Press Association, November 21, 2010.
• Obama Says Understands Ire Over Airport Screenings, Julie Pace, Associated Press, November 20, 2010.
• Ron Paul Introduces the American Traveler Dignity Act, E. D. Kain, Washington Examiner, November 19, 2010.
• Incoming Speaker Takes Commercial Flight, but Skips the Pat Down, Jeff Zeleny, New York Times, November 19, 2010.
• Lawmakers Jump Late into Airport-Scanner Uproar, Carol Pucci, Seattle Times, November 19, 2010.
• New York Lawmakers Try to Ban Body Scanners From Airports, Amar Toor, Switched, November 19, 2010.
• TSA Pat-Downs 'Overly Intrusive,' Key Lawmakers Say, Alan Levin, USA Today, November 19, 2010.
• Pilots to be Exempt from Airport Scanners, Intrusive Pat-Downs, Brad Knickerbocker, Christian Science Monitor, November 19, 2010.
• Pat-Downs at Airports Prompt Complaints, Susan Stellin, New York Times, November 18, 2010.
• Nader: TSA is Delivering Naked Insecurity, Ralph Nader, USA Today, November 18, 2010.
• U.S. Must Improve Traveler Privacy After Pat-Down Backlash, Lawmaker Says, John Hughes, Bloomberg News, November 17, 2010.
• 'Sully' Joins Opposition to Heightened Airport Security Measures, CNN, November 17, 2010.
• Body Scanners, Pat-Downs Violate Law and Privacy, Marc Rotenberg, CNN, November 17, 2010.
• Napolitano 'Open' to Fliers' Gripes Over Screening, Charisse Jones, USA Today, November 17, 2010.
• TSA Backlash Grows Over Leaked Body Scans, Many Other Scandals, Max Fisher, The Atlantic, November 16, 2010.
• Screening Protests Grow as Holiday Crunch Looms, Joe Sharkey, New York Times, November 15, 2010.
• Oceanside Man Challenges Airport's Full-Body Scan, Los Angeles Times, November 15, 2010.
• Growing Backlash Against TSA Body Scanners, Pat-Downs, Phil Gast, CNN, November 14, 2010.
• 'Invasive' Airport Screening Stirs Backlash Among Airline Passengers, Stephen Clark, Fox News, November 12, 2010.
• Ralph Nader and EPIC Take On Full-Body Airport Scanners, Neal Ungerleider, Fast Company, November 8, 2010.
• Airline Pilots Boycott Full Body Scanners, Sara Yin, PC Magazine, November 8, 2010.
• Group Slams Airport Naked Body Scanners, Dan Goodin, The Register, November 3, 2010.
• Group Demands Immediate Halt of Full-Body Airport Scanners, David Kravits, Wired, November 2, 2010.
• New Uproar Over Security Scanners After Agency Acknowledges Storing Images, Mary Forgione, Los Angeles Times, August 9, 2010.
• Group Concerned Airport Security Scanners Capture Nearly Naked Images, NBC, August 5, 2010.
• Feds Admit They Stored Body Scanner Images, Despite TSA Claim the Images Cannot be Saved, Aliyah Shahid, New York Daily News, August 4, 2010.
• Lawsuit Challenges Airport Full-Body Scanners, Katie Johnston Chase, The Boston Globe, August 4, 2010.
• Body Scan Images From Security Checkpoints Were Saved By Feds, Bianca Bosker, Huffington Post, August 4. 2010.
• Feds Admit Storing Body Scan Images, Declan McCullagh, CNET, August 4, 2010.
• EPIC Files Suit Against the Deployment of Full Body Scanners in US Airports, Yosie Saint-Cyr, Slaw (Blog), July 15, 2010.
• EPIC Files Lawsuit Against Airport Body Scanners, Growing Consumer Backlash, Consumer Federation of America, July 13, 2010.
• Backlash grows against full-body scanners in airports, Gary Stoller, USA Today, July 13, 2010.
• Privacy Group Files Lawsuit to Block Airport Body Scanners, Roger Yu, USA Today, July 9, 2010.
• Civil Rights Coalition: TSA Violates Travelers' Rights, Amy E. Ferrer, Bill of Rights Defense Committee Blog, July 6, 2010.
• Full-body security scanners scrapped at Dubai airports, officials say the device "contradicts Islam", Aliah Shahid, New York Daily News, July 6, 2010.
• Sikh concerns delay hand search plans at UK airports, Dil Neiyyar, BBC News, June 30, 2010.