Lifting the Mask Mandate for Air Travel Would Do a Lot More To Cut Down on Unruly Passengers Than an Expanded No-Fly List
Delta CEO Ed Bastian asked U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland to create a special no-fly list for passengers convicted of creating onboard disruptions.

Airline executives are asking the federal government to expand its no-fly list to include unruly passengers rather than repeal the masking rules that are making so many passengers unruly in the first place.
Over the weekend, media outlets reported on a Thursday-dated letter sent by Delta CEO Ed Bastian asking U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland to adopt a "zero tolerance" policy toward in-flight disruption. Specifically, Bastian asked that passengers convicted of disruption onboard a flight be added to a national, comprehensive, unruly passenger "no-fly" list that would bar them from flying on any commercial airline.
"This action will help prevent future incidents and serve as a strong symbol of the consequences of not complying with crew member instructions on commercial aircraft," wrote Bastian, according to a copy of the letter posted by travel website The Points Guy.
That would be a pretty severe sanction. The federal no-fly list is, as Reason's C.J. Ciaramella described it, "a civil liberties nightmare: secretive and nearly impossible to challenge."
Once placed on the list, it's exceedingly difficult to have one's name removed from it—even for people who never should have been added in the first place.
The massive expansion of the federal no-fly list in the wake of 9/11 saw people added because of mistaken identities, clerical errors, or baseless suspicion of terrorism from federal authorities. One person who was added to the list because of a clerical error spent a decade trying to reclaim her right to fly.
Creating a new no-fly list to cover "unruly passengers" could ensnare a lot more people, particularly in an age of mask mandates. Bastian said in his letter that Delta had placed 1,900 people on its own no-fly list for not complying with masking requirements. Some 4,290 of the 5,981 unruly passenger incidents reported to the Federal Aviation Administration last year were mask-related.
Squabbles between passengers and flight attendants over masks also appear to be driving a huge increase in FAA enforcement actions. The agency reports unruly passenger investigations rose from 183 in 2020 to 1,099 in 2021, which resulted in 350 "enforcement actions" being initiated.
The FAA doesn't have the ability to bring criminal charges against people. Because Bastian's letter only asked that people "convicted" of disruptive behavior be barred from flying commercially, it's possible the number of people subject to the unruly passenger no-fly list would be smaller and come with some measure of due process.
Civil liberties advocates are still sounding the alarm about Delta's latest proposal.
"Generally, we think it's a bad idea," Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst for the American Civil Liberties Union, told NPR. "Our experience with government watch lists and ban lists has not been a good one."
Perhaps an easier, less authoritarian solution would be to just lift the existing federal requirement that people wear masks on planes.
In almost all of the country, one is allowed to sit maskless for hours drinking in a crowded bar or watching a movie in a theater. If that behavior is allowed, it's hard to see the reasoning behind stricter masking requirements aboard well-ventilated airplanes where the risk of COVID-19 transmission is low.
The long hours spent aboard planes or in airports, where face coverings are also mandated, make masking requirements all the more annoying and burdensome. That's probably why masks are the immediate cause of so many in-flight altercations.
That certainly doesn't excuse any individual passenger's violent behavior, but it does suggest ending mask mandates would be a pretty straightforward means of preventing it.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Airline executives are asking the federal government to expand its no-fly list to include unruly passengers rather than repeal the masking rules that are making so many passengers unruly in the first place.
Over the weekend, media outlets reported on a Thursday-dated letter sent by Delta CEO Ed Bastian asking U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland to adopt a "zero tolerance" policy toward in-flight disruption. Specifically, Bastian asked that passengers convicted of disruption onboard a flight be added to a national, comprehensive, unruly passenger "no-fly" list that would bar them from flying on any commercial airline.
They're a private corporation. They can lobby the government however they want. If you don't like it, build your own airline industry and then call the AG and ask him to make a no-fly list of your own.
Don't forget about taking billions of dollars in bailout cash every decade or so.
I make 85 dollars each hour for working an online job at home. KLA04 I never thought I could do it but my best friend makes 10000 bucks every month working this job and she recommended me to learn more about it. The potential with this is endless.
For more detail …. http://rb.gy/u603ti
Yes, they can lobby the government like any other private company. However, to ban you from flying an any airline is like wal mart banning you from shopping at any retail store.
If you don't like it, build your own airline industry then call the AG and ask him to make a no-fly list of your own.
You mean Tim Daly's career IRL?
There's nothing decent or honorable about a private company lobbying the government to enforce a rule on competitors who make more money by not voluntarily following suit.
So why can't an airline keep a no-fly list of its own, and refuse to book travel for passengers who have been disruptive or unruly in the past?
We are all in this together!
Though I don't think it's appropriate to put unruly people on a "no-fly" list, I think the government should support the ability of individual airlines to ban troublemakers from their aircraft.
On another note. If you hate masks that much, you are free to drive domestically to whatever destination you want.
you are free to drive domestically to whatever destination you want.
I agree with the emotion, but the concept is a canard. Frequently, driving is not feasible, and if crossing an ocean, the governmental regs are even worse.
As a matter of constitutional logic, if a right to peaceable assembly is guaranteed, then that includes a right to get to that location without governmental interference. Note that this is governmental interference. If Northwurst, Debtor or some other airline wants to have insane rules, one can always fly LibertyAir.
btw, the same argument applies to why there should be no TSA, and why if there is a TSA, they should not be demanding IDs.
Well, I'll say one thing: I won't go on any airplanes to fly anywhere, either domestically or overseas. People like you are going to keep this goddamned fucking pandemic going indefinitely, and we'll really be screwed as a country. Thanks.
Civil liberties advocates are still sounding the alarm about Delta's latest proposal.
Would that include the ACLU claiming that forced masking is a human right?
The long hours spent aboard planes or in airports, where face coverings are also mandated, make masking requirements all the more annoying and burdensome. That's probably why masks are the immediate cause of so many in-flight altercations.
That certainly doesn't excuse any individual passenger's violent behavior, but it does suggest ending mask mandates would be a pretty straightforward means of preventing it.
Eliminating standards of evidence and due process in murder trials is a recipe for disaster. While that doesn't excuse murderous behavior, it does suggest that these measures to roll back protections for the accused are not good for our justice system.
And ending the "pants mandate" would eliminate a lot of indecent exposure related offenses, too. Are you advocating that?
He's saying it would eliminate a lot of violence by frustrated pants wearers. Sounds like a win-win.
Hey baby, wanna join the 'Mile-High End The Pants Mandate" club?
*smack*
C'mon! You all saw it. The way she was dressed! She was practically begging to join the 'End The Pants Mandate' club!
The problem is the Mask Mandate. It is, by its very nature, almost unenforceable in any consistent or just way. I've sat on planes with my elbow on the arm-rest, nursing a drink a few inches from my mouth, and gotten an hour of mask free flight. And on other flights, someone bitches about it and the poor flight attendant has to make a decision.
Such a system only invites conflict between passengers and flight attendants, which is then aggravated by the fact that the fucking masks make it almost impossible to communicate without shouting.
And now that we know masking is more or less pointless, it makes even less sense.
On my recent flight the crew made an announcement reminding people to not pull down their masks when ordering their drinks, because it "defeats the purpose".
Nope! Ending mask mandates is not the way to go right now. Anybody who engages in violent and physically assaultive behavior on an airplane flight should immediately be removed from the aircraft, even if it means having to make an emergency landing on the way to a certain destination, after contacting the police in that emergency landing destination in order to do it, and have the perpetrator of the violent assault end up in the arms of the police, where such a perpetrator belongs.
Hey Ed Bastian....How about we adopt a 'zero tolerance' policy toward the following.
Snotty and unprofessional flight staff (and some are just butt-ugly)
Overpriced tickets, whose fees change hourly
Gratuitous fees
Entitled, privileged and pussified CEOs (I know one...Ed)
Canceled or late flights with little or no notice
GFY Ed. I will never fly on Delta again.
What do you think, Ed? How does Delta do on those measures?
Better yet, instead of letting the market operate (as it currently does), how about we nationalize it all and let the government run it, comrade.
We can call it "single flyer".
Never fly Delta.
It's not just Delta Airlines that fucks up a great deal. American and United Airlines, to mention afew, are rather good at fucking things up, as well.
As long as the airline is liable for damages if it turns out the 'disruptive' designation was misinformation.
Lots and lots of damages.
Lots and lots of video of these incidents.
Yup. Women wearing masks with crying babies who refuse to wear masks being ushered off of flights completely absent any evidence of COVID in the mother, the child, or anyone else on the plane. Lots and lots of videos.
A practical solution to this problem would be to advance criminal charges against every disruptive passenger; hold disruptive passengers responsible for all costs associated with their misconduct (fuel costs, costs of delays); and sue every disruptive passenger civilly, creating a record all carriers (not just airlines) could consult when considering whether to accept a prospective passenger's business.
Society and the airlines have been far too lenient on selfish, antisocial misfits who forfeit their privileges in civilized, modern society.
These “love thy neighbor “ posts always make me smile.
While in the air, the captain is law. Just like a ship. You obey the rules, no matter how much you disagree with them. Wear your seatbelt when the light comes on. Don't smoke. Don't be unruly. Follow any orders from a flight attendant.
You have no constitutional right to be a dick onboard an aircraft. Don't like it, go charter your own flight. Period.
Your deep principles tell you not to wear a mask? Fine, then drive to your destination bitching the whole way. But you do not have the right to choose for yourself on a private airplane flight you did not charter.
Isn't a no-fly list a government act? Delta banning you from flying Delta is a private act. Being put a no-fly list so no airline is allowed to have you as a passenger is a government act. Government acts require due process.
I never said you should be put on a no-fly list. But the choices given were either that or no mask requirements. My suggestion is to just let private companies set their own rules for their clients.
Uh, pilots don't set the rules on a plane. But you're right, if you are already on the plane, you just need to follow the rules.
The article is a suggestion about how those companies should make rules about masks. I don't think anyone was arguing that the airlines shouldn't be allowed to require masks. Just that the government shouldn't require them to require people to wear masks.
Private companies get to set their own policies. But we also all get to tell them what we think of them and how they could improve things.
But we also all get to tell them what we think of them and how they could improve things.
Normal people think so, but the authoritarian jeffbuck types don’t. They want you to shut up and follow the rules, no matter how stupid they are.
The airlines are not private companies. Mask mandates should be retained and re-enforced on airplanes. A nationwide mask mandate, as well as a nationwide Covid-19 vaccine mandate, should've been implemented and enforced from the start. Had nationwide mask and vaccine mandates been firmly enforced, instead of leaving mask and vaccine mandates up to the governors of individual states here in the USA to implement as they want, the United States, as a nation, would be out of the woods and back to normal by now.
Being put on it after conviction? Sounds like punishment for a crime. Sorta like the sex offender registry.
sort of like ignoring the 5th.
re: "While in the air, the captain is law."
No, he/she is not. Ships' captains get some discretion when they are international waters and because they were traditionally out of contact for so very long. Neither of those apply to most airplane captains. Nor, by the way, was admiralty law imported to the air travel context.
The captain is no more "the law" than the bus driver. Should you comply with the bus driver's reasonable requirements for passenger safety? Of course. Does that mean blind obedience to unreasonable demands, especially when they put other passengers (such as young family members) at risk? It does not.
The captain (and bus driver) can still kick you off. Which is currently what's happening because some passengers are acting like toddlers.
This is of course nothing new. Something about airplanes makes people revert to toddlers. I was on a flight once where takeoff was delayed as security came and ejected a passenger who refused to turn off his cellphone. Nonsense rule, but still a rule. You do what the flight attendants tell you or you don't get to fly.
Kicked off a plane is one thing, government backed no fly lists are a step too far.
But you do not have the right to choose for yourself on a private airplane flight you did not charter.
The bitching about not flying isn't a problem. Drove out to SD in '20, smiling at people and shaking hands within 6ft. of people the whole way.
The problem is when my in-laws fly in on a plane that's operating at 20% capacity, talk about how fabulous the flight was, how vacant the airports are, and can't figure out why their flight was so cheap.
"While in the air, the captain is law."
Except that the captain is being required to do this by the government. And the whole point of the article is they shouldn't be doing that. I know you don't want to talk about that, because it is inconvenient, but it is a fact.
You see, the problem here, Brandy, is that you actually want people masking up because you, like many other crypto-religious cult members, don't understand the science. But rather than admit that you, and your cult were wrong to insist that the science was settled, you now want to shift the argument from "should we be masking" to "should we be listening to the captain".
Stop doing that.
You'd think after years of being hammered after 9/11 and taking a $400M L as a company and $30B as an industry in 2022, investors and shareholders would be averse to CEOs saying "Our planes are jet-fueled disease vectors and there's nothing we, ourselves, can do about it." in public.
Apparently, asking the government to oppress the right people makes up for all that.
Perhaps ticket sales will start to takeoff.
Did pilots living under a lockdown experience cabin fever?
This is once again a clear result of trying to mandate behavior from people. You can look above at all of the little nazis in these threads, who are basically arguing "just put on the talismask and we'll get our boot off your neck".
"Just don't smoke weed and there won't be a problem"
"Just get your jab and there won't be a problem!"
"We need to dragnet all your data to stop the weed smokers!"
"If it weren't for those unruly terrorists, you wouldn't have to walk barefoot to the strip-scanometer!"
What starts with a "reasonable" request (wear a mask) has turned into the government operating a national database of people who are no longer allowed to fly. And people I normally see as libertarian don't understand what went wrong here.
smh
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/there-oughta-be-a-law
Damn you nailed the basis of my new article!
This doesn’t mean we need to scrap all laws, of course, only that we need to ensure that the laws we DO have are worth killing to uphold. Early in covid some town or another in California passed a rule like this one stating you had to wear a mask outdoors. Days later, the council was just SHOCKED that police had roughed somebody up for not wearing a mask. But the stories are common, because (say it with me!) the only tool the government has is force.
I can almost hear you now. “Surely you this is hyperbole! We don’t kill people enforcing all our laws!” And mostly, that is true. But, as in the case of Breonna Taylor, sometimes enforcement spins wildly out of control.
So “you can’t sell loose cigarettes” leads to the death of Eric Garner. (Who wasn’t even selling loosies that day!)
And “you are being too loud” leads to the death of Ryan Whitaker.
Even things like “this kid is playing in the park” can lead to tragedy.
Smoke all the weed you want Overt. I have no reason to care. Drag your covid infected, mouth breathing ass up next to me and my family, and we have a problem.
Vanishingly few people are interested in approaching you and your family. But there’d be no problem even if they did. You and your family’s safe & effective double vaccines + boosters, combined with the impenetrability of your masks, protect you, remember? If you think they don’t, you’re free to stay home and hide under the bed until the danger has passed (although I should warn you: the government and media will never admit that the danger has passed); whereas you are not free to dictate other people’s movements.
This moron still thinks that being vaccinated and being infected have some inverse correlation. Perhaps an advocate of the spontaneous generation hypothesis? Virus happens because of absence of vaccine.
He also seems to forget daily that most of the people he is arguing with are, in fact, vaccinated.
Convictions are a matter of public record. Nothing would seem to prevent Delta from adding these folks to its own no fly list.
As a side note: if someone with your same name causes a problem on a Delta flight, how does Delta know whether you or the disrupter is the one trying to buy a ticket?
This is why they want the national no fly list. It is linked to your federally recognized ID. When you are "booked" they take your ID and put it in the database, and then when you try to get through security they flag you and walk you into a dark room. If you made the mistake of purchasing a ticket, that's Delta's gain.
Well, with the way things are now, a no-fly list is a good thing to have. If people engage in violence and physically assaulting people on an airplane flight, they deserved to end up in the hands of the law, arrested, tried for and charged with assault in a court of law, end up behind bars, and to get a record that they can't get expunged, because once a person is 18 and/or over, they get a record that follows them for the rest of their lives, and if they're permanently banned from flying, by ways of a no-fly list, so be it. They have no right to be in a place where they'll endanger other people.
An on-site summary judgment death penalty would fix this in a jiff.
They check your name and your birthdate. It's a small pool of people.
Yeah, no other Bob Smith born on that day.
As a side note: if someone with your same name causes a problem on a Delta flight, how does Delta know whether you or the disrupter is the one trying to buy a ticket?
I mean, how many Spartacuses can there really be?
If baffles me when the media wonders why people are suddenly unruly on flights. Maybe because we're being forced to play along with pandemic theater until we get where we're going, and breathing through a mask for 10 hours blows.
Stay home snowflake.
LOL the people who are scared need to stay home. I've already gotten over covid. It was a moderate cold.
Blow it out your ass, ElvisisReal. Just because you had covid-19 doesn't mean that others will survive just because you did. You didn't get vaccinated and you don't wear masks, you're not being very smart. You have no right to go around infecting other people.
If anybody should stay home it should be little snowflakes like YOU!
WTF is wrong with this writer. Traveling on an airplane is the only reasonable way for people to travel distances and therefore not a casual and unnecessary act like going to a bar. If you modern spoiled snowflakes can't handle wearing a mask - laboratory proven to minimize transmission - that's not about "freedom", that's about being a weakling and a baby. Stay home.
Yeah. Babies wear bibs and masks.
Lab studies are meaningless to what happens when people use masks in the real world.
Why do I bother? You seem to be incapable of learning or updating your beliefs.
I like it. Let's get more rude people off planes permanently!
I agree with the article, but why seek the input of the ACLU? They're like tits on a bull....
I'm sure these new methods and reasons for adding people to a secretive government list that never goes away will only be used fairly and responsibly and as a last resort and certainly not to punish/trap overwhelmingly poor/minority people. That would never happen in the land of freedom.
Wow. The next morning before you and I become the first properly skeptical libertarian voices raised.
We have lost our mojo. Pre 9-11, even the notion of maintaining any sort of federal "you may not travel" list would have unleashed the most unhinged backlash among libertarians.
Now?
A giant "meh".
This is not a small deal. This is a really big deal.
And for those of you thinking "not another slippery slope fallacy"... The too of the slippery slope was way back when we were arguing about terrorism watch lists and how that list could never be used to target ordinary Americans.
All of those "why are there thousands of names on the no fly list" articles have long since disappeared. We are 2/3 of the way to the bottom of that slippery slope, and everyone is pretending that there is no hill.
I'm really surprised at the author and the commentariate for missing the obvious traditional libertarian observations.
First... Are we so far removed from the fake school board association letter that it has not occurred to this bunch of distrustful citizens that maybe, just maybe this is not an idea hatched from the mind of the CEO of an airline? I mean.... Exact same person in Garland. Exact same people in the white house. Extremely similar call for vast expansions of government power that can easily be used capriciously at the whim of those in power. Seems like a pretty obvious avenue of examination.
Also, on the caprecious front, who here trusts this administration (or any other, but this one in particular) to simply use this new power of banning people for being "unruly" in an evenhanded and just manner? Heck, if they were pure as the driven snow, any Libertarian worth her salt would be screaming about potential abuses. But with this administration?
Please....
Of course they are going to ban people they don't like. They already try to censor lefty voices like Bernie Sanders endorser Joe Rogan, simply because they do not stick to the company line. What in the world makes you believe they won't use pretext squabbles to ban rising voices on the right from transportation in America?
There is absolutely no reason to take any of this at face value. Not with these bad actors on the stage.
What's most interesting to me is how it grants what amounts to regulatory powers to private entities. A privately owned business, an airline, gets into a dispute with a customer about what occurs during the provision of a service to that customer. Currently, in the (relatively, as always) sane world, the business can decide to not do any further business with the customer if they feel it's not worth it. Now in the future (relatively, again) crazy world, the business can not just refuse to work with the customer itself, but prohibit any other otherwise willing business from servicing the customer either.
Imagine the possibilities! I can't wait to be threatened with permanent banning from all long distance transportation for leaving a bad yelp review. What a world, where flight attendants will have more power to destroy your life than a police officer. I'm sure this will do wonders for the quality and service of air travel.
The real problem here goes back at least 50 years. It is that the airlines treat their passengers like cattle. They can get away with it because industry has too little competition, because it is over-regulated.
Before Jimmy Carter abolished the CAB they were the main culprits in making sure the airlines always won disputes over their unreasonable demands. Now it is the TSA. I think it's high time to demand not just an end to mask and vax mandates, but abolition of the TSA. Let airlines compete to treat passengers decently, and at least some of them will.