HNHacker News
TopNewBestAskShowJobs

ehasbrouck

72 karma · joined February 25, 2017

submissionscomments
ehasbrouck··on Automatic registration for US Military draft to begin in December
The burden of proof is on the government to prove that any violation of the Military Selective service Act was "knowing and willful". That's almost impossible without a public confession, signature on a registered letter, or testimony of an FBI agent who served an order or notice to register or report for induction.

According to the Federal Office of Personnel Management, only 1% of cases of nonregistrants adjudicated by OPM result in denial of Federal employment. Almost everyone who appealed a denial got their job restored:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-02-07/pdf/2024-0...

ehasbrouck··on Automatic registration for US Military draft to begin in December
1 point by ehasbrouck 1 minute ago | root | parent | next | edit | delete [–]

The Selective service System is required by law to maintain readiness to activate either of two types of draft: a "cannon fodder" draft of males 18-25, or a "Health Care Personnel Delivery System" for men and women up to age 45 in 57 occupations: https://medicaldraft.info

Congress could decide to expand the latter to other non-medical occupations as a broader "special skills" draft.

ehasbrouck··on Automatic registration for US Military draft to begin in December
The way to make women ad men equal with respect to the draft is to repeal the Military Selective Service Act, as supported by many feminists:

https://hasbrouck.org/draft/repeal.html

More on what femninists say about the dratt and draft registration: https://hasbrouck.org/draft/women/feminism.html

ehasbrouck··on Automatic registration for US Military draft to begin in December
This article takes for granted the success of this attempt to "automagically" identify and locate all potential draftees, and doesn't mention the practical difficulties, the opposition, or the legislative alternatives.

Here's why this won't work and is such a bad idea, and why dozens of organizations have already issued a joint call to "repeal* the Military Selective Service Act instead of trying to step up preparations for a draft:

https://hasbrouck.org/draft/automatic/

and

ehasbrouck··on The TSA's New $45 Fee to Fly Without ID Is Illegal
This is not true, in at least 2 respects: (1) a common carrier has a legal duty not just to sell a ticket but to provide transportation according to the tariff, and (2) this means an airline can't order a passenger not to board, or order them off the plane, unless they have violated some terms of the tariff. Some airlines have tried to create their own no-fly lists, but without opening up another area of discussion these have no more basis in law than the government's no-fly list, and have never (so far as I know) been reviewed by courts.
ehasbrouck··on The TSA's New $45 Fee to Fly Without ID Is Illegal
As discussed in the original article, John Gilmore (co-founder of EFF) did sue. "His complaint was dismissed on the basis of TSA policies that said travelers were still allowed to fly without ID as long as they submitted to a more intrusive 'pat-down' and search. The court didn’t rule on the question of whether a law or policy requiring ID at airports would be legal, since the TSA conceded there was no such law."
ehasbrouck··on The TSA's New $45 Fee to Fly Without ID Is Illegal
The most recent press release from the TSA claims that it's now 6% of passengers not showing ID or not showing REAL ID: https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/releases/2025/12/01/tsa-intro... So down only slightly since May 2025 when they started "enforcing" a "requirement" to show REAL-ID.
ehasbrouck··on The TSA's New $45 Fee to Fly Without ID Is Illegal
FWIW, REAL-ID is not about U.S. citizenship: A passport issued by any country is considered "compliant" with the REAL-ID Act for air travel or any other purpose, regardless of the person's U.S. immigration status. Some politicians seem to have deluded themselves to think that requiring REAL-ID will stop "illegal aliens" from flying. But it won't. Many foreigners in the U.S. (regardless of U.S. immigration status) have an easier time getting REAL-ID (a passport from their country of citizenship) than some U.S. citizens.
ehasbrouck··on The TSA's New $45 Fee to Fly Without ID Is Illegal
As of the imposition of start of this new fee/fine, about 200,000 people a day fly without ID or without REAL-ID: https://papersplease.org/wp/2025/05/28/200000-people-a-day-f... - At $45 a pop, that would bring in >$3B a year. "A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money."
ehasbrouck··on The TSA's New $45 Fee to Fly Without ID Is Illegal
No, it's not "regulatory policy". It's been done entirely with some combination of secret "Security Directives" and "rulemaking by press release". As the article and the linked references explain, the TSA never issued any regulations, published any of the required notices, or obtained any of the approvals that would have been required even if Congress had passed an (unconstitutional) authorizing statute (which it didn't).
ehasbrouck··on The TSA's New $45 Fee to Fly Without ID Is Illegal
Unlike other service providers, a common carrier by definition cannot refuse service to anyone willing to pay the fare in the tariff. Common carrier laws are some of the oldest consumer protection laws, enacted to protect travelers and shippers of goods against predatory and discriminatory pricing. Federal law recognizes the "public right of transit" by air, and requires boith airlines and Federal agencies to respect it.
ehasbrouck··on CBP Enforces Binary Sex Codes and Enhanced US Passport Validation in APIs
Here's more on what's happening, what it means, and what you can do if you have an "X" passport:

https://papersplease.org/wp/2025/10/12/cbp-changes-procedure...

ehasbrouck··on Do you need ID to read the REAL-ID rules?
TSA video walkthrough of flying without ID: https://papersplease.org/wp/2021/04/08/tsa-posts-video-showi...

TSA ID verification procedures (redacted) for people without ID: https://papersplease.org/wp/2018/05/08/tsa-releases-redacted...

records of how the TSA decides whether to let you fly without ID: https://papersplease.org/wp/2016/06/09/how-does-the-tsa-deci...

ehasbrouck··on T-Mobile USA doesn't comply with its German parent company’s GDPR policies
I'm a citizen and resident of the USA. But I have travelled often in Germany, roaming on Deutshce Telekom cell towers using a cellphone with a T-Mobile USA SIM and a US phone number. DT has collected data about my roaming in Germany, and has transferred that data to T-Mobile USA for billing and other purposes. So some of the data about me held by T-Mobile USA, which T-Mobile USA has refused to allow me to see, was collected in Germany by Deutsche Telekom.
ehasbrouck··on T-Mobile USA doesn't comply with its German parent company’s GDPR policies
auf deutsch: "Fast 50 Millionen US-Konten betroffen: Telekom-Gruppe verschweigt Informationen über gehackte Personendaten", Matthias Monroy, Netspolitik.org, 16.08.2022:

Fast die Hälfte der Millionen Kund:innen von T-Mobile in den USA waren vor einem Jahr Opfer eines riesigen Datenverlustes. Die Deutsche Telekom als Mutterkonzern verletzt seitdem ihre selbst auferlegten Verpflichtungen zum Datenschutz.

https://netzpolitik.org/2022/fast-50-millionen-us-konten-bet...

ehasbrouck··on T-Mobile USA doesn't comply with its German parent company’s GDPR policies
My subject access request was not made pursuant to the GDPR. It was made pursuant to T-Mobile's contractually binding promises to act as a subsidiary of Deutsche Telekom, and DTAG's promises that all subsidiaries it is able to control would adopt and comply with its "binding corporate rules" on privacy.
ehasbrouck··on CCPA Scam – Human subject research study conducted by Princeton University
I got one of the "Tom Harris" messages, sent to an e-mail address scraped from the Web site of a small California-based nonprofit organization.

I've gotten no response to my e-mail messages sent to the 3 researchers who have identified themselves, or the Princeton IRB. But I was able to find phone numbers for all 3 of the researchers in their c.v.'s posted online. The Principal Investigator has yet to return my calls, but the grad student took my call. He referred most of my questions to the principal investigator, but he did tell me that they sent e-mail to between 200K and 300K addresses scraped form a list of the "top" 1M Web sites.

ehasbrouck··on TSA considers new system for flyers without ID
That depends on the state and the section of highway. There is no Federal prohibition on walking or bicycling along an Interstate highway right-of-way. State laws vary.

In California, for example, bicycling or waling on freeway shoulders is permitted except where specifically prohibited and signed. Bicyclists and pedestrians are prohibted from most California Interstate highways where there are alterantives bicycle and pedestrian routes, but there are mnay California Interstates on which bicyclists and pedesrians are allowed, including sections of I-5, I-10, and I-80.

In California, state law expressly allows walking along a freeway in an emergency:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....

ehasbrouck··on TSA considers new system for flyers without ID
When i first visited Shanghai in 1989, there were no bridges or tunnels between the Bund sid eof the river and the Pudong side, only the ferries. (pudong was mostly farms.) The ferries are less used now, but there are still some in operation, incluidng some that run 24 hours a day:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_Ferry

The ferries are especially useful if you want to take a bicycle across the river.

ehasbrouck··on TSA considers new system for flyers without ID
FWIW, during non-pandemic times there are scheduled airline flights from Tel Aviv (TLV) and Haifa (HFA) to Eilat (ETM).
ehasbrouck··on TSA considers new system for flyers without ID
I think the TSA's theory is that if you can answer questions about the data in the Accurint record about person X correctly (i.e. your answers match the Accurint record, even if it is erroneous), you must be person X. That's the essential assumption behind the current IVCC scheme, except that it is operated by the TSA rather than a contractor.
ehasbrouck··on No-fly list trial: Court awards fees on government attorneys’ bad faith
"I'd be interested to read an article about people being prevented from flying between Canada and Europe because of the US government."

Here you go:

https://papersplease.org/wp/2011/02/16/british-man-marooned-...

https://papersplease.org/wp/2011/03/18/canadian-denied-passa...

https://papersplease.org/wp/2011/05/25/us-intervenes-to-bloc...

None of these people were scheduled to fly to, from, or via the USA.

There have also been people denied passage on fligths between other countries, merely becuase they were scheduled to pass through US airspace without landing. But that's a different issue from the incidents reported in the links above:

https://papersplease.org/wp/2009/05/16/air-france-passenger-...

https://papersplease.org/wp/2010/06/07/another-paris-mexico-...

https://papersplease.org/wp/2011/07/25/mexico-barcelona-flig...

ehasbrouck··on No-fly list trial: Court awards fees on government attorneys’ bad faith
People have bene prevented from flying between Canada and Europe becuase of objections from the US government. So being able to cross from the US to Canada (assuming Canada would let her in, which isn't assured if she is a US but not Canadian citizen), that wouldn't guarantee being able to get back to her home and family and profession in Malaysia.
ehasbrouck··on No-fly list trial: Court awards fees on government attorneys’ bad faith
Generally a case is heard "en banc" by a larger panel only as an appeal -- at the discretion of the court -- from an inital decision of a 3-judge panel. In most of the circuits, en banc rehearing is before all the judges of that circuit. The 9th Circuit is so large and has so many circuit judges that even en banc appeals are haeard by only a subset of the circuit judges. An en banc panel in the 9th Circuit consists of 11 judges: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/general/2017/02/10/En_...
ehasbrouck··on No-fly list trial: Court awards fees on government attorneys’ bad faith
This was one of the issues raised, and resolved in Dr. Ibrahim's favor, in the second of the three appeals to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in this case.

The court found that she had sufficient connection to the US (including having lived in the US for years, and having children who were born in the US and are US citizens) to give her legal "standing" to raise these issues.

However, non-US citizens outside the US generally don;t have any right to challenge denials of US visas in US courts, which is why she remains barred from the US with no way to challenge that. (It's possible that one of her children could raise that issue in a US court, but they are afraid that if they they return to the US, the US might put them too on the no-fly list again, trapping them in the US.)

ehasbrouck··on Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident
FYI, I've added an update in the comments to my original article at:

https://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/002292.html

I finally spoke with United Airlines spokesperson Charlie Hobart today, after this article was published.

Mr. Hobart told me that the gate agents handling United Express flights at O'Hare, including those who called in what Mr. Hobart described as "Chicago Department of Aviation security officers", were employees of United and not of Republic or a third-party contractor.

Mr. Hobart claimed not to know whether or not "CDA security officers" are sworn law enforcement officers. That claim to ignorance strains credulity, unless United has deliberately kept its own spokespeople in the dark. And if United still hasn't been able to figure out, 10 days later, whether these thugs (I use that term deliberately, in its original sense of organized gangs that prey specifically on vulnerable travellers) were really police, how were passengers supposed to figure that out in the moment?

"I don't have access to that level of detailed information," he said in response to this and most of my other questions. When I asked if he could find out, he declined. "I'm not going to get into that level of detail."

Mr. Hobart said he didn't know whether the passenger was asked to leave by United or Republic employees, whether the "officers" were asked to remove the passenger by United or Republic employees, whether the officers talked to the pilots before removing the passenger, or how the officers identified themselves to the passenger.

"They were unable to obtain the cooperation of the passenger," Mr. Hobart said. He referred all my other questions to the City of Chicago Department of Aviation.

ehasbrouck··on Analysis of the United Airlines passenger removal incident
The article wasn't about me or my experience. I disclosed this background fact in case some readers might think it relevant in assessing my reporting and analysis. I've spoken publicly before about my experiences with Chicago police (not the Aviation Department police), including "minor" torture. (I repeat the qualifier, although in quotation marks because no torture is truly minor.) It hasn't risen to the top of my priorities to write about it in detail, largely because there are so many more significant stories of Chicago police torture, told and untold.

I wrote about my first arrest by Chicago police (not the one after which I was tortured) here:

https://hasbrouck.org/blog/archives/002168.html

If you want to discuss my personal history, get in touch with me directly, or leave a comment on my personal blog, which is probably a better place for that personal discussion than this third-party forum.

ehasbrouck··on Federal agents make domestic flight passengers show ID to disembark plane
Analysis from the Identity Project (PapersPlease.org):

"...In the case of Delta Flight 1583, we don’t know what would have happened if a passenger declined to answer questions, declined to show ID, or tried to walk past the CBP officers and leave the plane. Some of the passengers might perfectly legally have passed through TSA checkpoints and boarded the flight without having or showing any ID, as people do every day.

It’s unclear whether a court would find that, in the circumstances depicted in this photo, a reasonable person would have felt free to leave without answering questions or showing ID documents.

The Supreme Court has also ruled that law enforcement officers questioning and searching passengers on a common carrier are not required to tell you whether you have to comply with their “requests”, or to tell you whether you are free to leave.

The only way to find out whether you are required to answer questions is to stand mute. The only way to find out if you are required to produce or hand over documents is to keep them out of sight and not to hand over or open your bags or put your hands in your pockets. The only way to find out if you are free to leave is to walk away. The only way to find out whether government agents will allow you to exercise your rights is to exercise your rights. Only then are you likely to be found to have standing to challenge any infringement of your rights.

So far as we can tell, all the passengers on Delta Flight 1583 produced and handed over documents that the CBP officers found acceptable, and were then allowed to leave. So we will probably never know whether the courts would have upheld the legality of the CBP officers’ actions."

More (including links to statute and regulations purporting to authorize CBP boarding of domestic flights):

https://papersplease.org/wp/2017/02/24/border-search-and-id-...