Olivares v. Transportation Security Administration

819 F.3d 454 (D.C. Cir, 2016)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P is a foreign alien from Venezuela. P is an alien pilot who formerly lived and worked in the United States. On February 14, 2007, he was convicted in federal court of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute controlled substances in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. He was sentenced to serve 80 months in prison, followed by 60 months of supervised release. On December 17, 2007, FAA sent P a letter revoking his pilot certification, effective January 7, 2008. P was subsequently deported on March 3, 2010. P worked as a pilot in Venezuela. In 2011, P applied to attend a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)-certified flight school in France to obtain a pilot certification to fly large, U.S.-registered aircraft. If D, on behalf of the Secretary of Homeland Security, determines that an alien presents a 'risk to aviation or national security,' then flight instructors, pilot schools, and aviation training centers are prohibited from giving training to that alien on specified large, U.S.-registered aircraft. D thoroughly examines the immigration statuses of flight-school applicants. If an applicant is not eligible for admission into the United States and is seeking permission to attend an FAA-certified flight training program outside of the United States, TSA pursues a more searching investigation to determine whether the applicant presents a risk to aviation or national security. P was inadmissible to enter the United States due to his 2007 drug conviction. Further investigation uncovered that, in addition to his 2007 drug conviction, P had been suspected of firearms trafficking in 1998 in Aruba. D also discovered that, even though he had been deported with no right to return to the United States, P maintained a local address in Massachusetts. D thought P wanted to attend flight school in the U.S. P explained that he sought to attend flight school in France. D performed a follow-up review of his file. After conducting a background check, D determined that P was a risk to aviation and national security and denied his application. D gave no further explanation for its denial. P claims that D failed to satisfy the requirements of §555(e) when it initially rejected his application for training because the agency gave no 'grounds for denial.' P claimed that D's action was 'arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law,' because D failed to consider all relevant factors regarding his application for flight training. Shortly after P filed his petition for review, D submitted to the court internal agency materials that include the findings of D's background investigation as well as internal agency communications regarding the application. D submitted a sworn declaration explaining the grounds supporting D's determination that P was a risk to aviation and national security.