Gilmore

Gilmore v. Gonzales

Good Law
435 F.3d 1125·2006 WL 177213
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 25, 200604-15736California6,006 words

Opinion

Opinion

Paez, J.

John Gilmore (“Gilmore”) sued Southwest Airlines and the United States Attorney General, Alberto R. Gonzales, among other defendants, alleging that the enactment and enforcement of the Government’s civilian airline passenger identification policy is unconstitutional. The identification policy requires airline passengers to present identification to airline personnel before boarding or be subjected to a search that is more exacting than the routine search that passengers who present identification encounter. Gilmore alleges that when he refused to present identification or be subjected to a more thorough search, he was not allowed to board his flights to Washington, D.C. Gilmore asserts that because the Government refuses to disclose the content of the identification policy, it is vague and uncertain and therefore violated his right to due process. He also alleges that when he was not allowed to board the airplanes, Defendants violated his right to travel, right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, right to freely associate, and right to petition the government for redress of grievances.

Before we address the merits of Gilmore’s claims, we must consider the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.