Back to Squawk list
  • 108

Delta Air Lines asks Justice Department to help set up national ‘no-fly’ list of unruly passengers

Delta Air Lines has asked the Justice Department to help set up a national “no-fly” list of unruly passengers that would bar them from getting on any commercial air carrier, amid a surge in “air rage” incidents during the pandemic. In a letter sent to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland Thursday, the Atlanta-based company’s chief executive Edward H. Bastian said such a list would reduce the number of future incidents involving disruptive passengers. It will also “serve as a strong symbol of… ( More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

some of these comments are ridiculous..does anyone feel that unruly passengers who hit flight attendants, knock out their teeth,push them into carts,use abusive language and the like should be welcomed on ANY airline,not just delta??you cannot say that its "just a few", or even that alcohol is the reason for this type of behavior..there must be a point where people are actually held responsible for their actions, whether its onboard an airplane or any other place..EVERYONE has bad days or frustrations,and yes, covid weariness,but without repercussions, things would be and can get much worse!!
It actually should take care of itself. The offender should get jail time AND be sued by the employee and the airline. The government is already involved with laws on the books. Use them.
aknorris 4
Exactly the point Wallace. Thank you.
Chris Kenney -3
Wallace has it right. Thanks. The last thing we need is another government list that becomes a manipulation tool. Delta should grow some.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Gregg Hales 14
It is a worldwide problem Mary, the "new normal" that has been here now for decades, is "never take responsibility for your actions". We see it in court cases every day unfortunately, which is where most of the problems have developed and accelerated from, over the years, where someone is "not guilty" because they were upset/drunk/drugged or temporary-insanity etc.
I love my alcohol, but I don't then want to punch someone as soon as I have had a drink. In fact, no matter how much I drink. That is just an excuse for low moral code and lack of respect of yourself, let alone respect of others.
I have to wear steel cap boots where I work. I hate wearing steel cap boots, but that is my job. When I hear others at work whinge about it, and say the rules should be changed, my answer is "why don't you just find a job elsewhere?".
There are many places in life that have rules, not just flying, if you don't like them, or intend not to obey those rules, don't go there or participate in whatever it is. If you want to change those rules, become a politician or participate in policy creation to change the rule, and if enough people agree, the rules will change.
I think it should be enforced with the airlines, worldwide, not just in one country/state, if you want to be a moron, you walk in future. The only thing that needs oversight or the ability for appeal/removal from a no-fly list is the severity of the misdeed. Something like punching airline staff? No second offence rule, instant lifetime ban worldwide.
The reason we have these problems in our society in the first place is the repercussions for bad behaviour are non-existent or weak at best. We have created a "civilized", "goody two shoes", "everyone has rights" society, and we are reaping the rewards of that society in what we see daily.
Historically, most rules and laws it is said "are written in blood". Do we have to wait until one moron goes too far, and we have an air disaster, before something is done? And believe me when I say if that happens, no one will like the laws and control governments worldwide will create after such an incident.
dnorthern -5
Train boards to the left there, dude.
strickerje 15
If a passenger is charged criminally, then I wouldn't be opposed a ban from flying being part of the sentence. If it's just a civil issue (and let's be honest, there are certainly power tripping flight attendants who overreact in some situations), then a government-imposed ban from not just Delta but all airlines strikes me as a violation of due process. This request strikes me as Delta asking the government to enforce company policy, which, IMHO, is overreach.
Rick D 4
You are correct in that there are, and always will be, people who over-step their authority. If someone is banned from a certain airline it makes sense that they should be banned from others, but there have to be safe guards so a person in charge, having a bad day, can't destroy someone's reputation without cause. But that said, I agree with the comments from Mary Susan Watkins
WhiteKnight77 4
Unfortunately, not all of it are civil issues. Breaking a flight attendants teeth out or needing to be treated for a concussion is from an assault and such cases should be tried in criminal courts for such. Any convictions for such should end with an industry wide ban.
w2bsa 6
The airlines should get together and create the no fly list on their own. There should be some government oversight so the those who are placed on such a list have a way to appeal their placement on a no fly list.
Alan Dahl 3
It may actually not be legal for airlines to "collude" on creating a private no-fly list as likely the TSA and Air Martials are involved and there is quite a lot of legal exposure (you don't want as an airline to be sued when a passenger is added to the list). Having the government run the list removes a lot of liability for the airlines involved. The government could charge airlines or the unruley passengers directly for the costs involved in running the list if costs are an issue.
strickerje 5
I would agree, but only as part of a criminal conviction. There would need to be due process before being effectively banned from traveling, since flying is the only viable way to travel long distances in a reasonable amount of time.
Alan Dahl 4
That certainly isn't the case currently, the TSA can put you on their no-fly list without a formal conviction, even for US citizens. I would support some sort of appeal process however.
strickerje 5
Yeah,and I think that's a travesty too. But allowing an airline to unilaterally put you on the government no-fly list would be even worse.
Dagmar Graham 1
why wouls US citizens be excluded?? If they disobey the rules, consequences follow, regardless of one’s citizenship.
Dagmar Graham 2
Wellll, they should have thought of that before causing hate and discontent. Actions have consequences!
Jim Allen 1
Why not? Insurers do it. Trucking companies do it. Vegas casinos do it. I’m sure there are plenty of private databases out there. BTW - after 9/11 - they just had names on a no-fly list. I was detained at check in because my name was used by someone suspect. You wait a few minutes and they clear you through if you’re clear. It sucked because I was flying SWA and I lost my place in the boarding sequence.
strickerje 2
TBH I'm a little iffy on the airlines maintaining a collective list since that looks a lot like collusion among competitors, but it's sure better than getting law enforcement involved in civil matters.
Not sure I agree with the "power tripping flight attendants" comment.

The way a passenger should deal with a reasonable flight attendant: you do what they tell you to do.

The way a passenger should deal with a power tripping flight attendant: you do what they tell you to do.
strickerje 5
It sounds like you presume that as long as you obey, you won't get booted. There have been plenty of instances where that wasn't the case.
dnorthern -4
Actually you make a good subject. People like you are the reason despots flourish.
Chuck Lavazzi -8
Read the whole article. This is just asking the FAA to do its damn job.
strickerje 11
The DoJ isn't the FAA. Perhaps it's you who didn't read the article?
John D -3
Amen, sister. Some of these people seem to prefer anarchy. Would not surprise me one bit if they have behavior issues as well.
strickerje 13
Objecting to potential government overreach isn't the same as preferring anarchy. And to suggest those objecting are among the offenders is quite a stretch...
aknorris 8
Well said; however, looking at the comments here -- and the downvotes -- it sure seems like a lot of FlightAware commenters are more than willing to ignore overreach and attack anyone who questions it.
Brings to mind the saying (heavily paraphrased) "if you are willing to give up Liberty for a little Security, you deserve neither".
I'm truly disappointed and appalled by that.
strickerje 6
I've noticed that; there seems to be a disproportionate number of extremists on here. It's like an aviation themed Twitter. :)
dnorthern 1
Folks like you often confuse patriots for a schists.

You can’t help t though
dnorthern 1
Folks like you often confuse patriots for a schists.

You can’t help t though
boughbw 2
Nobody is being asked to give up all liberty for a little security. Funny how Franklin is always deliberately misquoted to imply that giving up any liberty for a little security means you deserve neither. In context, Franklin is saying that if you cede all of your rights to the king in exchange for safety, you don't deserve either.

So, humor me -- where in the Constitution are you granted the right to interfere in a commercial airline flight?
strickerje 9
Your last bit is a red herring; the constitution isn't a comprehensive list of individuals' rights, but rather an outline of the government's roles and, more importantly, limitations. We seem to have forgotten that the government was only supposed to have the powers enumerated in the constitution, not everything except what it explicitly says they can't do.
dnorthern 1
Your simplicity is quaint. Yet mind boggling
John Macaulay -5
Where in the Constitution does it grant anything to selfish airlines? Talk about entitled, airlines whine about their business being diseffected by the pandemic and then promptly up their collective hands out whining for taxpayer funded subsidies. What BS. multiple airlines companies received millions of taxpayer-funded $ due to their incessant whining about the pandemic impacting their business, no passengers. Let's explore putting airlines on a "no-fly" list. We can start with all those airlines who put profits above safety bought the prone-to-crash Boeing Max 80's.
John D 1
Seems the downvoters are getting some butthurt about being called out as being okay with disrupting air travel.
dnorthern -5
No. Some folks are not bootlickers like you
dnorthern -3
Bootlickers down vote. No surprise
Dale Ballok 15
Couldn’t the courts enact a no-fly penalty, along with a fine and possible jail time to these unruly passengers?
You screw up while driving your vehicle, your driving privileges get revoked!
aknorris 8
There are already federal laws in place. Charges can be filed and bad actors can already be tried and punished, including jail time.
Adding a federal "no fly" list isn't necessary if the existing laws are simply observed and executed. Delta knows this, making this move look more like pandering and posturing than an attempt to solve any real problem.
Edgar Reyes 2
yes along with all the airline costs for the passenger's disruption.
Juan Jimenez 3
There is already a national no-fly list. It is maintained by the FBI. No need to get judges involved, simply ban them from flying again. And the worst part for the offenders is that if they get on the US no-fly list, they might also land in the no-fly list of other countries. Can you say "Row your boat home!"
geroldn 14
I can see both sides of a national list argument. Wait until somebody named Jim Smith gets banned...
w2bsa 11
I can see why Delta wants to do this. They want to know if other airlines have banned certain people from flying on their airline and Delta wants to not allow them on their airplanes either. However, I think there are ways to do this without getting the government involved.
This should have been done long ago!

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

w2bsa 23
The airplanes that are flown by the airlines are private property. They have the right to remove abusive flyers and forbid them from flying their airline. The sticking point is the government maintaining the list. If the airlines want to share their lists or create a database of those they don’t want on their airline for cause they can do that. The ticket we buy to fly is a contract between the airline and the passenger stating that for the privilege of flying on their airline you must follow their rules. So, they have a right to deny travel on their airline for cause.
dnorthern 3
Actually, airlines are heavily subsidized by various levels of government. At least indirectly. As in, how many airlines build their own airports?
Dale Ballok 4
Good point about the terrorist watchlist!

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Jesse Carroll 4
Capt. Jesse
“We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”
- Ronald Reagan
get convicted, go Greyhound.
Sidney Smith 5
Not to worry, between the major carriers and the federal government this will be a mess. Anyone remember the post 9/11 lists? Complete confusion over more common names will ensue.
So tedious for the airlines to keep asking for help in managing their business.
Steve Ortiz 4
This whole topic of flight attendants reminded me of an usual incident that happened to me about 4 years ago.

I was flying First Class on American airlines, probably because we have used them a lot, over the years.

Well I heard a lot of bottle clinking, and realized I had to use the rest room. But when I got up, the flight attendant told me it was blocked and I would have to use the one in the rear of the plane.

So I walked back there and used the bathroom. After I finished, I walked back to return to my seat when I encountered a Second stewardess and HER cart.

As I excused myself to get around her to go a few feet further to my seat in First Class, she went off on me saying " YOU AREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE OUT OF YOUR SEAT!" Which got the attention of the First class attendant who had first given me instructions to go to the rear of the plane.

The First class stewardess piped up and told her " I told him to go on and use the one in the rear" to which the Voach class stewardess said "HE ISN'T SUPPOSED TO BE OUT OF HIS SEAT" as if the FC stewardess didn't know this... And she replied with " He had to go and I couldn't clear the bathroom door with my cart in the way". More was exchanged between them before the Coach stewardess relented and then let me thru.

OF course No one appologized to me.

So as far it only takes 1 Stewardess to get you in trouble - I have seen THAT.
Dan Grelinger 7
Why is Delta doing this? If they want to deny service to someone, I think they have the right. But to attempt to force other airlines to do the same thing? Why?
boughbw 8
As a courtesy to other airlines in dealing with known, bad actors before they can buy a ticket. If I am an airline and deciding whether I should sell a $300 ticket to some jerk convicted of offenses committed while flying just to have him cost me $60,000+ for a diverted flight, it is information I would like to know. Other customers can buy that ticket.
Kudos to Delta for trying formalize the process and placing a marker to deter dangerous behavior.
sprint113 3
I read somewhere that since Delta (and other airlines) are a common carrier, and because of that, their ability to "discriminate" against an individual and deny them service is somewhat limited. This does bring up the controversial existence of the federal no fly list, and arguably, the criteria for being put on "proper" (transparent, due process, etc.) no fly list would also meet the criteria for allowing a common carrier to refuse service.
patrick baker 2
i can not think of any compelling reason why lists of unruly passengers deemed no-fly are not being shared with all air carriers. Like airworthiness directives being shared universally and universally applicable to anyone having a copy of a defficient aircraft, these folks who have created dangerous conditions in one airliner are allowed to fly on other carriers? makes zero sense and is dangerous to boot. No excuses: enforce federal laws on passengers making dangerous conditions infight, and banish them forever. Indict them, try them and upon conviction, imprison them and fine them too. Doing otherwise makes a mockery of our laws and makes dangerous our airline cabins.
sconklan 5
This is not the Justice Department's job. They enforce laws passed by Congress. This should be done in other ways.
If there is a criminal conviction associated with an incident, then MAYBE (and I say it with hesitation, MAYBE) additional “banning” may be necessary.

But who gets to determine what “unruly” is? Much of what we’ve seen in the last 24 months arises out of the tyrannical and ineffective “rules” forced on the general and flying populace.

The airlines from day 1 should never have consented to play “mask police” …. the function of a flight attendant is to insure passenger safety with all matters regarding a flight …. not to determine if someone has on a face diaper LET ALONE THAT ONE IS BEING WORN “CORRECTLY.”

If the Feds had wanted to put Thousands Standing Around types on flights to play public health enforcers, fine …. but it’s not the job of cruise lines, airlines, and especially not their employees.

Back to the issue, in 1989-ish, I was flying Zurich to NYC with wife and daughter, probably July/August. The Swiss Air folks overloaded the L-1011 and with a strong headwind, a refueling stop was needed in Bangor, ME. After the refueling, a mechanic came on board, and we continued to sit on the tarmac. About 30 minutes later, the pilot announced that they had gotten a warning light during landing, that they believed was just the sensor/light, but would need to check further.

An hour later, they had opened rear doors, with anxious Italian smokers ready to fire one up even though they were being told NO. The pilot came back on and said that they were possibly going to fly a part in, but that if people wanted to de-plane, that would be accommodated.

My wife, who is a nervous flyer anyways, said she wanted to get off the plane, that she didn’t feel safe. I said okay. We were going to Rutland VT, so Bangor ME, was actually looking ok. More time passes, smokers in the rear getting more restless, I asked about deplaning. More time passes, I was then told by a flight attendant that they decided not to deplane, “because there was no Customs” — by this time the pilot had made one or more announcements that they’d make a “fly” or “no fly” decision in an hour or so. My wife again said that she wanted to get off.

So, I told out attendant that we wished to deplane. Period. I was told that the plane might still fly out. I said we didn’t care, the offer was made, and that we wanted to get off. The response I got was sort of “tough beans” to which I responded, in order for this plane to leave, all passengers must be seated and secured, and that I would NOT be sitting down.

So, fast forward. The three of us, and some other woman, decided to press the issue and we got off. Inside the terminal, there was a huge Custom’s area with staff (nothing like being lied to). So we went through customs, I got a rental car, and as we were preparing to drive off, we could see everyone else being de-boarded. I turned around, we were able to get our bags, and off we went.

So, was I “unruly”? I didn’t yell or curse at anyone. I didn’t push or hit anyone. I took the pacifist’s approach.

Idiot Ed at Delta wants to play GOD as he constantly does, but “banning” people at whim is the height of arbitrariness and runs counter to how our daily lives should mesh with our government.

I shudder at what we’ve (collectively) become.
Sometime you just have to suck up a bad flight and keep your attitude to yourself. When you said that you would not sit down you inconvenienced everybody else on board. Who are you to hold up the flight for everyone else ? Self appointed pacifists can be just as wrong as the drunk on the last flight of the night.
dnorthern -3
You were correct on all counts and did the right thing.

There will be some, however, who will deride you for what you did as they themselves are weak and fearful for standing up for themselves.

The current rhetoric is designed to criminalize folks who react, however appropriate, to poor customer service. That sissified segment of our society are sad, pathetic individuals who want you, and me, penalized because we refuse to kiss the orifice of the lower digestive system as they do.
What’s sad is that were everything the the same, but the year 2022 instead of 1989, would I have been arrested for “not following flight crew instructions” or for “unruly behavior”?

Would the drones of today have marched me off in cuffs in front of my wife and daughter?

As I said, I feel sorry for what we’ve become.
If you did your stunt by standing up and delaying the takeoff of the plane by all means you would have been marched off the plane in handcuffs with the other passengers applauding your removal.
dnorthern 1
Nice. “What if “ game. Children play that game often.
You obviously didn't read the very long original self serving pitiful comment by ray netherwood. Do you homework before you make a jerk out of yourself. There ain't no "what if."
ray netherwood -1
No worries, literacy and attention to detail not exactly Charles’ strong suits.
Edgar Reyes 3
Banning the unruly passengers from the airlines for 2 years the first incident, 10 years for the second and for life the 3rd one seems fair to every one.
dennis Hansen 4
Delta needs to look at how they treat customers... i saw firsthand what they did to an elderly gentleman65+ face mask was on his chin.. i would have fired the attendent
Mark Kortum 4
Everyone who trust the Federal Government, including the NSA, FBI, DHS, or CIA, to manage such a list fairly and not abuse this power are free to dislike this comment.
Its about time to ban these idiots from flying.
Joe Keifer 6
Someone needs to do a root cause analysis of why this is happening.
Dale Ballok 2
Oh, you mean do a “study” on it?😂
Mike Mohle 1
And also make them pay for the direct and indirect costs of their actions for diversions, missed connections, etc.
Jim Welch 2
When everyone is aware of the rules to fly commercial, we expect them to abide by those rules, or find another mode of transport. Becoming airborne with a few hundred other travelers, & then deciding to be an ass and protest mid-flight has to have serious consequences!

“I don’t care if I ruin hundreds of people’s vacations, cause them to miss weddings or funerals, because I am going to make my POINT!!!”

Get off the airplane, Karen. Have fun on the train.
Jesse Carroll 2
“We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.”
- Ronald Reagan
Wish we could clone this GREAT PRESIDENT....
I am all for airlines collectively banning unruly passengers. The Government needs to administer the list and have an appeal and "rehab" procedure in place. As a tradeoff from the airlines, I would like to see the Government make a minimum standard for seat pitch to give us just a little room when we fly.
Randy Manning 0
So you moron believe in the communist ! Marxist dictatorship! Show a report that people got the virus on any airline! and have you heard from the CDC saying the vaccines is not working, that you need more vaccines!! Maybe we should get all the vaccinated people off the airplanes!! you dang sheep moron!!
What a stupid comment. You absolutely have the right to prove your stupidity in this country and you just did.
dnorthern 1
You beat him to it
So where do you disagree with my comment about banning unruly passengers and getting more room on an airplane ? Sounds like your stupidity is up there with Randy Manning's.
This is easy - did you see how the Biden Administration labeled parents who spoke out at their school board meetings as "domestic terrorists?" LOL.

They could do the same thing here. And that should trouble every single one of us.

With that said, unruly passengers need to calm down - you are legally required to follow the direction of the air crew. Southwest took alcohol off their planes because they saw the trend - maybe Delta should follow their lead?
dennis Hansen 1
so true!
msetera 1
So any Karen flight attendant who doesn't like how you wear your mask can put you on a no-fly list? Are they also going to require everyone to chant "Hail Fauci" too? This is ridiculous.
boughbw 0
Yes. If a flight attendant does not like you, then you are placed on the No-Fly List and can never fly again.
Minesh Patel 1
The insurance companies have access to common claims database and know all your previous claim.
On our flights we had lots of people with our face mask but no fights.
Mary Henry -1
Way past due , They should be banned on other airlines as well
w2bsa 5
The only thing that I disagree on is that the government shouldn’t actually create the list, the airlines should. There should be some government oversight so that folks have a way to contest their placement on the list.
Dale Ballok 0
“Contesting placement on the list”? Act civilized, and there’s no problem for anyone!
strickerje 12
Unless you happen to have the same name as someone on the list?
Long overdue!
Chuck Lavazzi 1
Works for me.
john dugan 1
dnorthern 2
You should be “punished” as well.
Fazal Khan 0
If the airlines want that list they can spend their owm money, don't ask us to spend our tax payer moey on this, and as somebody said beow, its gonna be a mess anyway if "they" get involved ...
ADXbear -2
Good, ban for 3 years first offense, life on second, reduce alcohol sales
dnorthern 13
Alcohol is not the causal factor. If it were we would have seen a statistically significant number of alcohol related issues prior to COVID.
JJ Johnson 1
Why do the elitists in Congress get to remove their masks and the people have to wear them on airplanes? This insane Covid tyranny and hypocrisy not just alcohol is triggering some of this radical behavior. Admit it. Democrats are hypocrites. Joe built all of this.
Randy Manning 1
When the big corporation and the big government get through taking all you sheep's freedom away out there !! don,t say a dam thing, You dam sheep Morons!!
Delta is asking only to ban them while the mask rule exists (ends in March). I think these scofflaws should be banned on ALL airlines forever!
Mike Mohle 3
Or, just drop the face diaper requirement now, instead. Obviously the beautiful people in the fancy boxes at the Super Bowl are immune, but the minions in the stands still need to mask up. Total theater (unless they were all holding their breath, LOL).
fred darnell 0
quit bein so damned arrogant .. try a little courtesy for your neighbor for christs sake,,,,,people should be banned from all airlines...period
John Macaulay 0
& airlines accepting taxpayer-funded bailout should refund all these subsidies. Can't have it both ways.
tcavin -4
TOTALLY bad idea
“BuT mUh FrEeDuMs!” squeal the right-wingers who argue that punching a flight attendant is just ‘exercising their 1st amendment’.
WhiteKnight77 0
Don't go there.
Joe Keifer -5
Mayor Pete! Get rid of the mask mandates!

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

Rolf W. 10
Me as a German, I'm speechless...
boughbw -1
With apologies. A certain segment of United States society is paralyzed from the neck up. They do not understand that rights exercised without responsibility is just freedumb. The lack of brain activity prevents them from feeling the effects of cognitive dissonance stemming from their denying the Holocaust while asserting even the most trivial of inconvenience constitutes fascism on par with Hitler, or claiming to dislike Hitler while worshipping our white supremacist ex-president. No offense was intended, he's just offensively ignorant.
strickerje 3
I don't agree with the Nazi references, but you do the other side no favors with the name-calling and "white supremacist" rhetoric.
boughbw -3
You do that side a tremendous favor ignoring their white supremacist motives.
strickerje 6
Sorry, but I see no evidence of "white supremacist motives". You just sound like you're so partisan as to be beyond reasonable.
Chuck Lavazzi -1
Why, yes, being banned from flying because you refuse to honor your end of the conditions of carriage and get violent in the air is *exactly* the same as being shoved into a boxcar and tortured to death. /s
Gregg Hales 0
Wow Chuck, I think you have just proved that some of the readers, judging by the negative rating of your comment, are not erudite enough to comprehend the enormity of sarcasm. Which means they won't understand this comment either ;) Obviously oxymorons that have wasted their breathing space.
dnorthern -1
Yep. Your ancestors were as well back a hundred years or so. And we know where that got us

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

dnorthern -5
Poor Germans. All upset as reality bites.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

brice bier 0
screw ANY corporation that has a desire to be in bed with a very corrupt government!
John Macaulay -4
Is anyone else disgusted by these selfish as hell airlines companies having received millions of taxpayer-funded $ due to their incessant whining about the pandemic impacting their business, no passengers. So now these airlines have passengers & they're whining, again. I am going to explore putting airlines on a "no-fly" list. We can start with all those airlines who put profits above safety bought the prone-to-crash Boeing Max 80's. I volunteer to never fly commercial, again. If you're wondering who I am, just keep any eye out for the middle finger pointing at the habitually-late and/or cancelled commercial flights on the ground, going nowhere in a hurry. Kiss My As_, Delta!
Randy Manning -7
I would say that all this started when the mask mandate was put in effect, there is enough studies out there that mask will not protect you from getting the virus, or any virus for that matter! Its the politics of it that is getting in the way! And now the airlines are wanting more government involved? Its not about the mask people , its about controlling you!! wake up you stupid sheep's!!! The way you stop this is don,t pay money to these communist airlines!! If you fight back ! the airlines are the ones being protected! they need to be sued too stop this crap!! about the mask!! its about submission to the communist Marxist big businesses and the Marxist government!!
Mark Pillow -1
Soon they will scan your social posts prior to issuing a boarding pass.


Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.