I’ve written about this case before, but a federal appeals court held that security searches before Tampa Bay Buccaneers games are not unconstitutional because the fan who challenged them had consented. I have no idea on whether or not the reasoning is legally valid. I assume the court would find some similarity to the security need that would allow a default airport search to be constitutional. I don’t necessarily agree with that, but it’s beyond my point here. Specifically, the case is being influenced by this:
Rick Zabak, an attorney for the Tampa Sports Authority, the government agency that runs the stadium, said he’s trying to determine whether the court’s decision allows the searches to automatically resume at the Buccaneers first preseason game Aug. 10 or if he has to ask a court to reinstate them.
Operating a sports stadium is never going to qualify as a public good. No government should be involved.
If the team owned the stadium, the ruling would be a
slam-dunk touchdown. As a private entity, the Buccaneers have the right to put in place such a security measure. If you don’t like it, don’t buy a ticket to the game. It’s that simple.
The court relied on the correct notion that there is no “constitutional right to watch a football game”. But the city placed itself in charge of how fans may partake of that activity. Perhaps the city has evidence to suggest its stadium is at high-risk of an incident. Watching Black Sunday one too many times doesn’t count. When it (incorrectly) controls access in this manner, it should have a higher burden than fans are aware of the search policy in advance and that tickets can be revoked by the team.
This case stinks of all that is wrong in public financing of preferred private ventures.