Gilmore v. Gonzales
| Gilmore v. Gonzales | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit |
| Full case name | Gilmore v. Gonzales |
| Argued | December 8 2005 |
| Decided | January 26 2006 |
| Citation | 04-15736 |
| Case history | |
| 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 | |
| Judges sitting | Associate Judge: Richard A. Paez Senior Judges: Stephen S. Trott, Thomas G. Nelson |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Paez, joined by Trott, Nelson |
| Laws applied | |
| — | |
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 against 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 could still travel without identification if they instead underwent the more stringent "secondary screening" search. While the court saw the Security Directive[clarification needed] 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 precedent for the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ Egelko, Bob (December 9, 2005). "Judges cool to ID complaint". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved May 26, 2023.
- ^ Egelko, Bob (January 27, 2006). "Man who wouldn't show ID at airport loses appeal". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved May 26, 2023.
- ^ Egelko, Bob (January 9, 2007). "Supreme Court rejects ID challenge". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved May 26, 2023.
External links
[edit]- Gilmore v. Gonzales information
- Justices won't intervene in terror case, CNN, January 8, 2007
- Text of the 9th Circuit decision from the court's web site
- Supreme Court Order Denying Certiorari, Order List 549 US, January 8, 2007, p. 3.
.svg){kind=small} | This United States government–related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
