U.S. Supreme Court Denies Bucs Fan's Appeal Of NFL's Patdown Rule

Patdown Rule Has Been In Effect Since '05 NFL Season

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday "declined to take up the appeal" of Buccaneers season ticket holder Gordon Johnston, who claimed that the NFL's patdown policy "violated his Fourth Amendment privacy protections," according to Bill Varian of the ST. PETERSBURG TIMES. Johnston "acknowledged that his cause is dead unless another challenge emerges." Johnston: "I still feel like I have a right to go to a ball game without being touched or patted down." The NFL ordered fan patdowns at the start of the '05 season "in response to terrorism concerns." Patdowns at Raymond James Stadium "were on hold during the legal back and forth but resumed Oct. 12 after" the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a stay. Until that point, the stadium "remained the last NFL stadium where the patdowns did not occur." Attorney Rick Zabak, whose firm represents the Tampa Sports Authority, which operates the stadium, said, "We're now doing what all the other teams are doing and we have been for a good part of this season." Johnston said that he is "evaluating whether to continue buying season tickets in the wake of the ruling." A 49ers season ticket holder also has presented a challenge before the California Supreme Court in response to the patdowns (ST. PETERSBURG TIMES, 1/22).