|Exit Lane Litigation Call Summary
On Wednesday afternoon, roughly 120 airport representatives participated in a conference call with ACI-NA and AAAE representatives and the lawyers at Anderson & Kreiger who have been retained by ACI-NA andAAAE to seek review by the U.S. Court of Appeals of TSA’s ASP exit lane amendment.
Scott Lewis and David Mackey from Anderson & Kreiger explained that because ACI-NA and AAAE will be petitioning for review as representatives of all of their aggrieved members, it will not be necessary for all of the individual airports adversely affected by TSA’s action to file their own separate petitions for review. Instead, our plan is to file a single petition naming ACI-NA and AAAE and a number of individually-named representative airports as petitioners. The airports that volunteer to serve as named petitioners will share equally 1/3 of the cost of the combined effort, with ACI-NA and AAAE covering the remaining 2/3 of the cost. Anderson & Kreiger agreed to cap at $10,000 the maximum charge to any individually-named airport petitioner. We will be forming a small working group of airport representatives to work with Anderson & Kreiger as they move forward with preparing all of the necessary papers and shaping the arguments for the Court of Appeals.
Airports that are interested in serving as named petitioners or participating in the working group should contact ACI-NA, AAAE or Anderson & Kreiger as quickly as possible.
Shortly, Anderson & Kreiger will be seeking from TSA, on behalf of all of the affected members of ACI-NA and AAAE, a stay of its orders pending appeal, so that the Court of Appeals can rule on the merits of our petition before the ASP amendment takes effect. If, as we expect is likely, TSA does not grant a stay, A&K will seek a stay from the Court of Appeals when it files our petition for review in early December. Our petition for review will challenge TSA’s mandate that airports assume responsibility for monitoring exit lanes on various grounds, including TSA’s failure to comply with the decision by Congress to assign this responsibility to TSA and TSA’s failure to comply with the rulemaking requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act.
Scott and David explained that if individual airports elect to file their own, separate petitions for review, they will almost inevitably be consolidated with ours, so that all of the airport petitions are briefed and argued as if they were a single appeal.
We urge any airports that are contemplating filing their own petitions to advise us immediately and closely coordinate their efforts with ours.
After the lawyers from Anderson & Kreiger completed their summary, they answered questions from many of the airport representative who were on the line concerning the implications of joining (or not joining) as an individually-named petitioner; the costs of participation; the scope and timing of requests for a stay pending appeal; the potential participation of A4A and airline representatives in the challenge to TSA’s action; and the opportunity for the general public, including families of 9/11 victims, to be heard.
Airport representatives who wish to participate in future informational conference calls or receive updates should send their contact information to ACI-NA and AAAE.
Following are the key points of contact for questions about the exit lane litigation:
At Anderson & Kreiger LLP:
Scott P. Lewis
David S. Mackey
If you have any questions or comments, please contact Christopher R. Bidwell, Vice President, Security and Facilitation, at (202) 861-8081 or <a href="mailto:lbeairsto, Director, Public Safety and Security, at (202) 861-8082.