Court Opinion

ID: 9437188
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 03:39:35.274253+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:24:37.137892
License: Public Domain

HENRY, J.,
concurring.
I join this opinion, but not without some indigestion. My discomfort comes not from my brethren’s correct exposition of the law, but from the action — or rather, the inaction — of the FAA in this case.
Although the opinion correctly states our required deference, and although I acknowledge that deference is especially important in the regulation of aircraft visa-vis the FAA, it seems strange that the investigators here (1) never informed Mr. Barrie of their concerns about Mr. Distefano accompanying him, and (2) they happened to have a video camera ready to film.
One wonders if this entire matter could have been prevented by a simple cautionary word from the Aviation Safety inspectors here. See FAA Compliance and Enforcement Program, FAA Order 2150.3A, p. 13 11203(a) (“In any situation where Aviation Safety Inspectors identify a potential violation they should take appropriate steps to prevent it [including] notifying] the air carrier....”).