|
|
Home :
Safe and Free
:
Secrecy
Massachusetts Pilot Cleared in Court Settlement; TSA Drops Accusations Based on Secret Evidence (8/7/2006)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: media@aclu.org
BOSTON, MA -- The American Civil Liberties Union of
Massachusetts announced today that it has settled two cases brought on behalf of
Massachusetts pilot Robert Gray who had been labeled a threat by the
Transportation Security Administration (“TSA”) based on secret evidence.
"This has been the most traumatic experience of my life,” said
Gray. “We live in a country whose very formation was based upon the ideals
of freedom and fair treatment. To see this country's government behave as
it did was quite a shock.”
Gray added that he was lucky to
have had the support of his wife, Joy, and his employer, Cape Air, along with
his attorneys to see him through the ordeal. “I am happy that the
government has had the courage to rectify its position, and I am relieved that
this is finally over," he said.
Gray, a lawful permanent resident
of the United States originally from Northern Ireland, had been labeled by the
government as a threat to aviation or national security in January, 2005 and
rejected for training to fly planes larger than the commuter planes he had been
flying for many years.
The rejection was based on secret
allegations, secret sources, and secret evidence, which prevented Gray from
challenging the accuracy of the accusations being made against him. In
July 2005, the ACLU contested the TSA’s actions against Gray in two federal
lawsuits charging that Gray had been denied due process of law and fair
treatment by the government.
In announcing the settlement, ACLU
volunteer attorneys Hugh Rappaport and Paul Holtzman of the Boston law firm
Krokidas & Bluestein, reported that the TSA had agreed to a statement that
based on current information, Gray was not a threat to national security or
aviation. In addition, the government has agreed to provide specific
contact people within TSA who will attempt to resolve any problems that may
arise for Gray as a result of the earlier accusations the agency made against
him.
“Mr. Gray’s ordeal demonstrates the danger of a system
in which the government can destroy a person’s career on the basis of
accusations that are as unreliable as they are secretive,” said Rappaport.
“We are proud to have worked with the ACLU to help Mr. Gray establish his
innocence and vindicate his constitutional right to challenge the groundless
accusations against him.”
The attorneys filed two cases on Gray’s
behalf for technical reasons involving challenges to administrative agency
decisions, one in U.S. District Court in Boston and the other in the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the First Circuit. The cases, both entitled Gray v.
Transportation Security Administration, have been on hold while settlement talks
have been taking place. At one point before talks began, the government
seemed to retaliate against Gray for having challenged the training denial
through lawsuits by temporarily putting his name on the “No Fly” list which
prevented him for a number of months from continuing to fly even the smaller
planes he had been authorized to pilot and from flying as a passenger.
Sarah Wunsch, an ACLU of Massachusetts staff attorney, noted:
“Cape Air deserves a lot of credit for sticking with a good employee whom they
knew well. Many people are not so fortunate and lose jobs, the ability to
fly even as a passenger, and suffer other consequences, including the anxiety
and distress from being branded a danger to public security without knowing what
they are accused of.”
“Robert Gray was more fortunate than
many,” Wunsch added, “because he was able to get the government to drop the
still secret accusations against him. But when the government acts against
people using information based on grudges, bias, suspicion, and fears, our
safety isn’t protected while innocent people are injured.”
|
|
|
