The TSA has allegedly violated its own rules by forcing a passenger to go through an AIT device, causing a severe injury.
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents have often been in the news recently for some strange reasons. For instance, in mid-February, a TSA worker had allegedly scolded a woman for not wearing anything under her hoodie, which made headlines.
This time, the TSA is making waves again after a traveler filed a lawsuit against the agency. The plaintiff claims that she was forced to enter an Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) device, which resulted in a severe injury.
TSA Forces A Passenger Through An AIT Device, Causing Severe Spinal Injury
A 12-page complaint filed by Kerry Thomas against the United States of America has recently surfaced. The events narrated in the complaint occurred nearly two years ago, on May 21, 2024, at Atlanta Hartsfield International Airport (ATL).
According to the document, the plaintiff requested a pat-down search at the North TSA checkpoints at ATL to avoid screening in an AIT due to her spinal cord implant. These devices help alleviate pain and are implanted beneath the skin. They work by delivering electrical impulses to the spinal cord and can be destroyed by an AIT’s electromagnetic field.
Despite the woman's request for a pat-down search, a TSA agent told her that her only option was to pass through the AIT device.
“After the Transportation Security Administration employee or agent ignored Plaintiff’s medical identification card and Plaintiff’s pleas to be screened via patdown, the Transportation and Security Administration employee or agent stated, “the only way you are getting on the plane is to go through the machine,” the complaint reads.
Before passing through the device, the plaintiff spoke to another officer, trying to explain the situation, but was told that the AIT machine had been “adjusted” so that it would not damage her spinal cord implant.
When the passenger entered the AIT device, however, she immediately felt a shock from the electromagnetic charge, which destroyed her spinal cord implant, leaving her in pain. “As a result of Defendant’s negligence, Plaintiff suffered injuries and tangible damages and intangible damages, requiring medical treatment, including surgery,” the complaint reads.
Spinal cord stimulators are used to manage pain caused by a variety of health conditions, including chest pain, back pain, phantom limb pain, neuropathic pain, and spinal cord injuries, among others.
Following the incident, the plaintiff went through an adjudication process with the TSA. However, this proved unsuccessful, leading her to file a lawsuit against the agency. The woman is now seeking an unspecified amount in compensation for the past, present, and future:
- Physical and mental pain and suffering
- Loss of enjoyment of life
- Physical and medical treatment and expenses
- Mental anguish
- Loss of earnings and income
- Loss of ability to work
- Other damages (lost property, permanent injury)
According to the complaint, TSA agents ignored rules that specifically require workers to offer a pat-down search for passengers with medical devices that screening machines may damage.
While AITs are often harmless, they can damage medical devices such as pacemakers, defibrillators, and spinal cord implants. According to the TSA’s official website, passengers with internal medical devices should inform their TSA agent of their medical condition and request a pat-down instead.
“Inform the TSA officer that you have an artificial knee, hip, other metal implant or a pacemaker, defibrillator or other internal medical device. You should not be screened by a walk-through metal detector if you have an internal medical device such as a pacemaker. Consult with your physician prior to flying,” the TSA website states.
In this regard, the complaint states, “One or more of the Transportation Security Administration’s employees or agents knew or should have known that the machine in which Plaintiff was forced to enter had not been recalibrated or adjusted so as to not cause harm to her spinal cord stimulator.”
This wasn't the first time TSA agents had been caught breaking their own rules.
TSA Has Recently Been Caught Breaking Its Own Rules
A passenger recently posted his encounter with a TSA agent on Instagram (see above), sharing his experience as an amputee. He was first denied access to the TSA lane designated for travelers with mobility needs. The traveler was then publicly asked a question about his disability, something in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).
In addition, in the summer of 2025, TSA agents denied some passengers the right to opt out of facial recognition, despite the TSA’s official website claiming, “Passengers who have consented to participate may choose to opt-out at any time and instead go through the standard identity verification process by a Transportation Security Officer (TSO).”
These cases highlight the need for better training of TSA workers to be fully aware of the agency’s internal regulations and other U.S. laws that may affect their work. At the moment, it remains unclear whether the traveler whose spinal cord implant was damaged will win the lawsuit and receive compensation.
Read the original article
Comments
I’ve been in a film photography sub on Reddit lately and the TSA comes up frequently. They can’t even follow their own rules on film, telling people it has to be scanned (it doesn’t), scanning is safe up 3800 ISO (that’s not a speed), etc.
I’m not surprised they can’t get something important right.
What if someone had to fly for necessary medical treatment? What if the device had been something even more important, like a pacemaker or artificial heart like Cheney had?
By SunshineTheCat 2026-03-0621:422 reply Yea I once had a TSA individual take my 85mm f1.2 RF series Canon lens out of its case and hold it up to the light to "inspect it."
I said, "can you please be careful with that? It's a $3,000 lens..."
The person cut me off and flatly stated: "Excuse me sir, I know what I'm doing..."
The great thing is that if the person had dropped it, they would've faced zero consequences and I would be out a lens which was central to my need to travel.
I don't intend for this to sound like an excuse. I don't fly often, and almost never with anything expensive.
But I am curious:
Can objects like expensive precision optics be insured against damage from the TSA? Is that a thing that regular people can easily find coverage for?
Every photographer with expensive equipment that I know has insurance for their equipment. Sometimes it is included with homeowner, sometimes a separate rider, and sometimes part of their commercial insurance. So it would be covered.
However, that wouldn't help OP if they needed the lens for their trip, suddenly need to find another one, and needed to float the cash until insurance pays out.
By SunshineTheCat 2026-03-0621:582 reply Yes, my lens was/is insured.
The problem is, it's not something you can just pick up at Best Buy, so the trip would've been a total loss (it was for business).
By Spartan-S63 2026-03-073:591 reply And even if you could be made whole via insurance, the TSA agent not facing repercussions and the system not having a feedback loop to improve is the actual problem.
By 1659447091 2026-03-078:18 > the TSA agent not facing repercussions and the system not having a feedback loop to improve is the actual problem.
They do. A group of them play in the local co-ed sports leagues, including one in upper management. I had an issue at a different airport, filed a minor claim, and when I next saw them mentioned it wondering if it will just get filed away in the bin. They said I most likely just got someone fired. Later I heard that manager mentioned the story in a meeting reminding them of diligence and professionalism. Though, I've never had issues at my home airport where they work -- and they take issue with agents at airports like the other one that make their job more difficult/unpleasant. They take a lot of abuse.
By ssl-3 2026-03-073:39 As a follow-up:
Yeah, Best Buy is right out. So are most local camera shops (if you can even find one where you're going), since many won't stock a $3k lens.
But there are camera shops in the world that will deliver things very fast -- for a price.
Might there be insurance available that softens that kind of blow to an adequate level? Maybe not erasing your loss, but making it able to be absorbed and still get some work done in 16-24 hours or something?
By to11mtm 2026-03-0622:12 It kinda depends.
For instance, Many insurers offer something akin to 'Valuable Property Insurance' (At least that's what mine is called) and for personal use it covers drop/breaks as well as theft.
You typically need proof of ownership; my insurer lets me upload that, so I usually make a point to upload a copy of the invoice/receipt as well as the camera/lens and closeup of the serial number (even better if the invoice has the S/N present!). That's more important for high dollar items typically.
-HOWEVER-
That's for personal use. A while back I actually hit a coverage threshold where my insurer sent me a letter basically saying "Hey, just so you know, you are not covered for business use". (I don't use for business, I just figured it was a cheaper hobby than a boat)
Edited to add:
FWIW the VPP policy is separate from a homeowners policy, however insurers may or may not (depending on state law etc) be able to use a claim on a different policy to impact rates/etc.
Your house insurance will generally cover it. However they then mark you as a increased risk for claims and so your rates go up. Thus it probably isn't worth making a claim for something that is "only" a few thousand dollars. Insurance is a great idea for rare things so expensive that you couldn't handle the loss on your own, but for smaller value losses self-insure is likely a better idea in the long run.
Of course you would need an accountant to run the real numbers for each case. Most people would find a $3000 lens breakage something they cannot easially cover out of pocket, which is why many will even if in the long run it isn't the best use of money.
By to11mtm 2026-03-0622:26 Depends on the numbers/specifics. Some homeowners policies may exclude high dollar items or limit the coverage to items in the premises (i.e. if it was stolen off the shelf in the house, that could be covered, but not necessarily other scenarios.)
A specific policy can still be cheap however; mine comes in at about 311$ of replacement value per dollar of premium a month, if you're traveling a lot or shooting at places where stuff can come up missing it's not the worst peace of mind.
By 1659447091 2026-03-077:48 > Can objects like expensive precision optics be insured against damage from the TSA?
"You may file a claim if you are injured or your property is lost or damaged during the screening process."
It takes ~6 months or so, and you need to be very thorough and provide as much info as you can (like receipts to prove the cost). And they do actually investigate, even for minor claims and will send a check if they were at fault (ie, not the airline losing your stuff).
By to11mtm 2026-03-0622:05 I had TSA swab the front of my Sigma 100-400 because it purportedly came up hot. Will at least give that guy credit, he was gentler handling it than I ever am.
That said, yeah you would have been hosed for that lens, but I'm pretty sure they could still face consequences and you'd at least eventually get some reimbursement (less the time dealing with the process)
By formerly_proven 2026-03-0621:482 reply > What if someone had to fly for necessary medical treatment?
E.g. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/02/disabled-can...
By alluro2 2026-03-0622:03 I always make sure to consider there are 2 sides to the story and details and nuance make all the difference in how the actual situation unfolded - but it's really, really, difficult to imagine a scenario in which something like this would be understandable.
By MBCook 2026-03-0622:02 Of course there’s an example. Thank you.
By idle_zealot 2026-03-0621:541 reply There's no consistency in procedure from TSA agents. They're undertrained, unaccountable, and some combination of bored, disinterested, and high on petty authority. I don't think any amount of training or official guidance could improve the situation, though. The essential problem is the authority plus unaccountability or oversight. That will always go poorly for anyone subjected to that authority sooner or later.
Perhaps once AI destroys all the livelihoods of educated and disciplined white collar workers, it'll be easier for the TSA to find people who can follow basic instructions and show a normal amount of empathy.
I think it's the job, not the person. All sorts of people work at the TSA; clearly it's endemic to the TSA, not to the people who work there.
You have to deal with pissed people all day who don’t listen at all. And if you make the tiniest mistake you could be the person who failed to stop the next 9/11.
Doing the same three or four things screening people all day long has got to be mind numbingly boring. Unless you’re at an airport that isn’t constantly busy where instead you get to stand around doing nothing, which can be worse.
It honestly sounds like a terrible job to have. Aren’t they paid pretty bad too? I can see why a lot of people would want to move out of it, leaving only those who are stuck or like the power.
None of this is excuse what happened in the article.
By mbirth 2026-03-080:48 Yep, just think of those people in front of you, that pass the same several large signs telling them to make sure that all their liquids are in a 1 litre ziplock bag and have that bag ready for inspection (this is in Europe) … and then doing a surprised Pikachu when the security personell asks them about why their perfume isn’t in said bag. Then starting to repack their hand luggage while the whole queue has to wait and watch.
And you only experience those few people in front of you. The security staff has them all day long.
By tpm 2026-03-078:39 There are people at airports all over the world doing very similar jobs to this. I have no experience with the TSA but noticed the attitude varies widely country to country and even airport to airport. I guess my point is it can be done with empathy and respect, even if the rules are strict.
By readthenotes1 2026-03-0622:27 And then the job will drive that empathy right out of them.
By tpm 2026-03-078:35 It's always the leaders of an organisation that are responsible for the behavior. Always.
I'm one of those weirdos who opts out of the scanners because I'd rather avoid having people casually look inside of my body.
Last time I flew out of Laguardia I opted out and while I was being patted down another TSA agent about twenty feet away kept making kissy faces at me. Very much felt like intimidation.
What a time..
By whatsupdog 2026-03-0621:594 reply I do that too. My reason is I don't want unneeded radiation. My experience is they make it as difficult as possible. They first ignore you couple of times, pretend they don't know what you are asking for, and finally they make you wait a long time, just standing there waiting for someone to show up to do the pat down. But I know their antics now and show up with plenty of time to spare.
By mindslight 2026-03-0622:06 It's been a while since I've flown, but it always seemed to help to not stand completely out of the way lest they forget about you. A bunch of people will ask if you if you're waiting to use the scanner, or even start queuing up behind you until the thugs direct them to go around you. But all this keeps the incentives aligned much better.
Same. I have never gone through a microwave scanner on principle- I shouldn’t be strip searched for the crime of showing up to the airport.
I always get there plenty early and request a pat down, because they always make you wait 10-15 minutes in the hope that you’re desperate to get to your gate.
" I shouldn’t be strip searched for the crime of showing up to the airport."
People have forgotten that the TSA got caught lying about the machines not taking pictures (its just a cartoon!) and their employees laughing at people's bodies.
If the TSA wants to disrobe me they're going to have to do it the honest, old fashioned way. Not some sterilized make believe.
By lobf 2026-03-0622:37 I have never forgotten their lies and abuse with the scanners when they were rolled out. Same boat- you wanna see my body you gotta work for it.
By whatsupdog 2026-03-0623:21 > If the TSA wants to disrobe me they're going to have to do it the honest, old fashioned way. Not some sterilized make believe.
Or at least take me out on a date first
By realityfactchex 2026-03-0622:081 reply I always opt out, too, also because I don't trust their machines after reading enough stuff like https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/iaurm/cancer_clus... or https://www.propublica.org/article/u-s-government-glossed-ov... and then learning enough about how it was all for theater anyway.
Cool tech, but I don't want it scanning my junk especially, no thanks. I'll just apply Betteridge's law of headlines to the article "You Asked: Are Airport Body Scanners Safe?" at https://time.com/4909615/airport-body-scanners-safe/ and go on my merry way.
The TSA definitely seems to intentionally make me wait unnecessarily long for my patdowns to commence.
The attitude among some TSA employees can be truly confrontational when I'm nothing but polite.
One of them literally shoved their hand so fast and so far up my leg, it stung my private area for a good little while after. Now, whenever their script comes to the point where they ask if there is anything they should know, I have to ask them to not do that please, since it has happened before.
If there is a list of people to be first in line for UBI instead of whatever they do now, I'm okay if it's everybody at the TSA, and I'm guessing that they would be cool with that, too.
By kube-system 2026-03-0622:19 Y'all should just get pre-check (or GE) so you can walk through the metal detector instead.
By rngfnby 2026-03-0622:03 Whistling loudly helps too.
By rngfnby 2026-03-0622:03 We're not weirdos. The weirdos are the cattle walking into a microwave oven.
They ask me "would you like a private screening?"
Hell no! I need witnesses.
By mindslight 2026-03-0621:481 reply Talk about l'esprit d'escalier. I'd like to think I would have held eye contact and pointed at my own crotch.
Hmm next time they go for a feel I'll tell them not to sexually harass me loud enough for the whole line to hear.
They feed on folks wanting to avoid embarrassment, not wanting to miss their flights, etc.
By BobaFloutist 2026-03-0623:30 Also on folks not wanting to have their shit stolen, get beaten up, or get extra-judicially detained for days, weeks, or even months.
They're smart enough to make compliance be the mostly rational decision.
By Balgair 2026-03-0715:24 One trick with opt outs: suit and tie.
The 'better' you look, the less they'll worry and faster they'll be. If you look like some business person that's 'important', they treat you like one too. Airline staff generally follows that principal too, especially if you wear a nice hat for some reason. Not a ballcap, fyi. Though once you sit down in coach, the game is off.
Oh, also, squinting at the TSA nametag and saying 'Thank you/Excuse me, Officer John Doe', yeah, makes them feel big and respected. Gotta work the referees here.
Like, just generally following and slimy salesman tactic and reading 'How to Win Friends and Influence People' will work very well with TSA (most people, really).
Mostly treat that individual well, the same comes back.
Now at small regional airports with a few flights a day, really nothing works, those folks are there for the power trip and couldn't break into the local PD good ol boys network and got rejected from the army. Not always, but mostly. They never get an opt out either, so they have to go really by the book as they mostly forgot what to do.
