| Gilmore v. Gonzales |
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
|
Argued --- December 8, 2005
Decided --- January 26, 2006
|
| Full case name: |
Gilmore v. Gonzales |
| Citations: |
04-15736 |
| Prior history: |
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Subsequent history: |
U.S. Supreme Court |
|
| Holding |
| That neither the identification policy nor its application to Gilmore violated Gilmore's constitutional rights |
| Court membership |
| Associate Judge --- Richard A. Paez |
| Senior Judges --- Stephen S. Trott, Thomas G. Nelson |
|
| Case opinions |
| Majority by: --- Paez |
| Joined by: --- Trott, Nelson |
|
| Laws applied |
| --- |
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Gilmore v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 1125 (9th Cir. 2006), was a lawsuit filed by John Gilmore[1] against various United States executive and independent agencies and departments, and United Airlines. Gilmore claimed that being required to show identification in order to travel by plane inside the country is an unconstitutional restriction of his rights to travel, to petition government, and to speak anonymously. Gilmore also complained about being subject to "secret law," when the airlines and government refused to show the directive under which they were requesting ID.
The district court and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals sided against Gilmore,[2] holding there was no constitutional violation because air passengers can still travel without identification if they instead undergo the more stringent "secondary screening" search. While the court saw the Security Directive in camera, the public still has not been permitted to see the text.
Gilmore petitioned for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, but in January 2007 the court declined to hear the case.[3] As a result, the case is common law for the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Notes
External links
|
