Why Republicans are balking at a no-fly list for unruly passengers

[Septua]

34. Retrumplican mentality

"Putting aside the fact that the Constitution makes no reference to "interstate transportation," and the idea that such a "right" exists is dubious, it's still not a persuasive argument: Americans who lashed out on airplanes, disrupting flights and throwing potentially dangerous in-flight tantrums, almost certainly should be restricted from “engaging in interstate transportation.” It's about holding people accountable for their own misconduct, the same way people who are caught driving dangerously are sometimes stripped of their licenses."

"The rest of the GOP senators’ pitch is hardly better. Banning passengers who engaged in dangerously anti-social behavior “would seemingly equate them to terrorists” who also endanger passengers? Perhaps, but as a matter of public safety, who cares about perceived rhetorical equivalencies?"

About the same nonsensical argument as the Jan 6 raiders being just another tour group. Lock 'em up.