N
O
.
12-1307
In The
United States Court of Appeals
For The District of Columbia Circuit
I
N RE
E
LECTRONIC
P
RIVACY
I
NFORMATION
C
ENTER
,
Petitioner.
On Petition for a Writ of Mandamusto Enforce This Court’s Mandate
B
RIEF
A
MICI
C
URIAE
OF
T
HE
C
OMPETITIVE
E
NTERPRISE
I
NSTITUTE
,
R
OBERT
L.
C
RANDALL
,
N
ATIONAL
A
SSOCIATION OF
A
IRLINE
P
ASSENGERS
,
E
LECTRONIC
F
RONTIER
F
OUNDATION
,
C
ENTER
F
OR
I
NDIVIDUAL
F
REEDOM
,
C
YBER
P
RIVACY
P
ROJECT
,
C
ENTER
F
OR
F
INANCIAL
P
RIVACY AND
H
UMAN
R
IGHTS
,
D
IGITAL
L
IBERTY
,L
IBERTY
C
OALITION
,
AND
T
HE
R
UTHERFORD
I
NSTITUTE
I
N
S
UPPORT
O
F
P
ETITION
F
OR
A
W
RIT
O
F
M
ANDAMUS
T
O
E
NFORCE
T
HIS
C
OURT
’
S
M
ANDATE
H
ANS
F.
B
ADER
Competitive Enterprise Institute1899 L Street, N.W., Floor 12Washington, D.C., 20036(202) 331-2278hbader@cei.org
Counsel for Amici Curiae
i
R
ULE
26.1
C
ORPORATE
D
ISCLOSURE
S
TATEMENT AND
C
ERTIFICATE OF
P
ARTIES
,
R
ULINGS
,
AND
R
ELATED
C
ASES
None of the movants is owned by a publicly-held entity or has anymembers who have issued shares or debt securities to the public. Nopublicly-held entity owns more than 10% of their stock. The movants,who seek to become
amici curiae
, include: Competitive EnterpriseInstitute (CEI); Robert L. Crandall; National Association of AirlinePassengers (NAAP); Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); Center forIndividual Freedom (CFIF); Center for Financial Privacy and HumanRights (CFPHR); Cyber Privacy Project (CPP); Digital Liberty (DL);Liberty Coalition (LC); and The Rutherford Institute (RI). Except forthe entities listed in the preceding sentence, all parties, intervenors,and amici are listed in the Petition for Mandamus’s Certificate of Parties, Rulings, and Related Cases, so movants otherwise adopt thatCertificate as their own. Robert L. Crandall is an individual. NAAP is anon-profit membership organization. CEI, CPP, CFIF, EFF, and RI arenonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations. LC is a nonprofit. CFPHR is part of the Liberty and Privacy Network, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization. DLis a project of Americans for Tax Reform, a nonprofit 501(c)(4).Dated: July 19, 2012 Respectfully Submitted,/s/ Hans F. BaderH
ANS
F.
B
ADER
Competitive Enterprise Institute1899 L Street, N.W., Floor 12Washington, D.C. 20036
Counsel for Amici Curiae
ii
T
ABLE OF
C
ONTENTS
Interest of the
Amici Curiae
..................................................................... 1 Argument ................................................................................................... 1I. The TSA’s Airport Screening Policies Affect Millions of Americans, Yet Passengers Have Been Deprived of theOpportunity to Participate in TSA Rulemaking. ............................... 1II. The TSA’s Failure to Promptly and Meaningfully ProgressToward Complying With This Court’s Mandate Constitutes“Unreasonable Delay” ......................................................................... 3III. In Creating the TSA, Congress Intended That the AgencyPromptly Commence APA Rulemaking Regarding ExplosiveDetection Equipment at Airports. ...................................................... 7IV. Members of Congress Have Repeatedly Expressed Concern Overthe TSA’s Policies Regarding Use of AIT Scanners for PassengerScreening. ........................................................................................... 8Conclusion ............................................................................................... 11
R
ULE
32(A)
C
ERTIFICATE OF
C
OMPLIANCE
................................................ 12
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
CEI TSA Amici Brief in Support of EPIC's Petition for Writ of Mandamus
269
Reads
0
Readcasts
1.2K
Embed Views
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
