Boston's Alternative Source! image!
   
Feedback


TODAY’S JOLT
Judicial overreach at Logan Airport
BY DAN KENNEDY

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2001 — Today’s Boston Herald reports that the security firm booted out of Logan Airport last week following two post–September 11 lapses has won a reprieve. The front-page exclusive, by David Guarino, reveals that Logan’s new security director, State Police colonel John DiFava, failed to follow state law when he lifted Argenbright Security’s permit without first letting the company defend itself at a hearing.

Now, there may be less to this story than meets the eye. When DiFava announced his action on November 15, he said Argenbright would continue to provide security until a hearing could be held on November 30. Thus, Guarino’s lead — that Argenbright "will man checkpoints on the busiest travel day of the year because of a procedural flub" — overstates the case, since Argenbright would have been on duty through the Thanksgiving weekend even if DiFava hadn’t screwed up. DiFava’s position was that Argenbright would have to operate without a permit until the hearing. Suffolk Superior Court judge Allen van Gestel countered that the hearing would have to come first.

Still, van Gestel’s intervention on behalf of Argenbright raises a serious issue. Given the need for strict new airport-security measures following the terrorist attacks, shouldn’t public officials have the widest possible latitude? Why is a judge giving aid and comfort to a company that has been accused of endangering the public? And if van Gestel is simply following the law — as I assume he is — then why is no one screaming to change that law?

Logan Airport, let’s not forget, was the starting point for the two jetliner attacks on the World Trade Center. Argenbright employees reportedly committed two serious breaches of security after that, leaving checkpoints unguarded on September 29 and again on November 13. Not only that, but last year the company was fined $1.2 million in Philadelphia for violating federal law, including the hiring of felons.

A former Argenbright employee offered this cheery assessment to Janet Wu, of WCVB-TV (Channel 5): "Generally we tend to get, and I hate to use this term, but it applies, bottom-feeders, people that work for us because they can’t get a job anywhere else." (For an opposing view, check out Argenbright’s company profile on the Herald’s very own jobfind.com help-wanted site, which includes this: "High performance has always been and will continue to be Argenbright’s focus.")

Whether the fault lies with Judge van Gestel or with the law he’s sworn to uphold, what we have here is a serious case of judicial overreach. It would appear that, this time at least, no real harm was done. But what if Argenbright decides to keep fighting? What if van Gestel or some other judge rules that DiFava has no right to get rid of the company even after the November 30 hearing? At what point will the public official charged with responsibility for security be allowed to, you know, take responsibility?

At a time when the president is announcing the formation of military tribunals that could try suspected terrorists on secret evidence and sentence them to execution without appeal, it seems insane that the judicial system would do anything to prevent Logan officials from making long overdue changes aimed at protecting the public.

Agree? Disagree? Got a gripe with our writer? Respond to "Today's Jolt" in the Phoenix Forum.

Issue Date: November 21, 2001

A complete listing of our Web exclusive daily content.





home | feedback | about the phoenix | find the phoenix | advertising info | privacy policy


© 2002 Phoenix Media Communications Group