Winging it

We rightly try to keep terrorists off planes to stop them from, you know, turning them into missiles. Now a movement is afoot to put unruly passengers on a Federal Aviation Administration no-fly list. Consider us extremely unconvinced. As much as anyone, we loathe jerks who refuse to wear masks, or drink to excess and fight with the guy who put his seat back, or shout at the lady with the baby. And we feel for the flight attendants who get harassed, truly we do. But if the agitators make a scene on Southwest or Delta or JetBlue, Southwest or Delta or JetBlue can get them arrested — then bar them from future flights. Creating a single consolidated government directory of People Who May Not Board a Commercial Airplane Because They Misbehaved is draconian in what is supposed to be the land of the free.

Indeed, we’re surprised that only Republican senators signed their names to a letter opposing the idea, given that Democrats correctly argue in other contexts for banning the box, arguing that a single criminal mistake ought not get someone fired from their job, evicted from their apartment, barred from voting or otherwise unfairly crimp their future. Even decent people have horrible days, especially when they’re forced to bear the stresses and indignities of travel.

There’s another problem. Unruly passengers were at their peak when COVID was at its peak. Disputes over masks fueled most incidents. But those numbers have already come down substantially — to 6.2 incidents per 10,000 flights — and should the airplane mask mandate expire on March 18, they’re likely to come down far further.

Perhaps a three, four or five strikes and-you’reout policy could be tolerable, acting as a deterrent while grounding the unfairness of a zero-tolerance ban. But even the terrorist no-fly list, a fine idea in theory, proved error-prone, leading a judge to rule that the government hadn’t created a constitutionally adequate process for people to challenge their inclusion.

We just don’t think this thing is meant to fly.