The USA Division of Homeland Safety (DHS) introduced on Tuesday that it was scrapping a coverage requiring folks to take off their footwear whereas passing by means of airport screenings.
The coverage, lengthy a supply of ire for travellers, had its roots within the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, assaults on the US, when authorities sought to bolster safety round air journey by means of a bunch of measures.
Many extra guidelines have been added within the time since, some criticised as arbitrary and needlessly intrusive, and have been supplemented by the combination of measures reminiscent of facial scanning know-how at airports throughout the nation.
What’s behind the change, what guidelines stay, and will different insurance policies change subsequent?
STARS, STRIPES, AND SHOES ON! 🇺🇸👟
Below the management of @Sec_loemDHS is asserting a brand new coverage right this moment which can enable passengers touring by means of home airports to maintain their footwear on by means of safety screening at TSA checkpoints.
This coverage change will drastically… pic.twitter.com/clyk46RXvI
— Homeland Safety (@DHSgov) July 8, 2025
What was the ‘footwear off’ coverage?
The “footwear off” coverage was first applied by the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) in 2006 and required travellers to take away their footwear as they superior by means of airport safety screenings to verify them for doable explosives.
These enrolled in TSA PreCheck, a programme wherein individuals who go a fundamental safety verify are allowed to bypass sure airport safety measures, had already been allowed to go by means of screenings with their footwear on.
Why was it applied?
The coverage was the results of a failed December 2001 assault by a British man named Richard Reid, who packed explosives into his footwear and tried to detonate them throughout a flight from Paris to Miami.
The incident, like many tried assaults carried out within the post-9/11 interval, was extremely beginner: Reid, a petty prison who turned an Islamic fundamentalist, was foiled after an airline employee observed that he was making an attempt to mild his shoe on hearth with a match.
However the failed assault performed into fears that have been outstanding through the post-9/11 period. And, when it got here to security, why take an opportunity?
“TSA can’t simply depend on the following assault being as incompetent as this one was,” Jay Stanley, a privateness advocate and senior coverage analyst on the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), instructed Al Jazeera.
The company requested folks, on a voluntary foundation, to contemplate eradicating their footwear whereas passing by means of screening so that they may very well be checked for explosives. TSA later made the coverage necessary in August 2006.
An FBI agent, left, sits subsequent to a suspect recognized by authorities as Richard Reid, proper, as he’s transported in a automobile from State Police barracks at Logan Worldwide Airport in Boston on Saturday, December 22, 2001 (Elise Amendola/AP Photograph)
Why was the coverage scrapped?
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem mentioned in an announcement on Tuesday that eliminating the coverage would take away a supply of pressure on travellers and cut back TSA wait instances at airports, and was now not obligatory because of technological improvements.
“We count on this alteration will drastically lower passenger wait instances at our TSA checkpoints, resulting in a extra nice and environment friendly passenger expertise,” she mentioned.
The change was efficient instantly.
What different insurance policies stay in place, and will they modify?
Whereas the “no footwear” coverage is gone, travellers anticipating a simple, stress-free journey to the airport ought to mood their expectations as many different safety measures stay in place.
Passengers will, for instance, nonetheless must take away their belts, coats, laptops, and sure objects from their luggage whereas passing by means of safety. Guidelines limiting gels and liquids in carry-on objects to three.4 ounces (100 ml) nonetheless apply, and checked luggage should even be subjected to X-ray screenings.
Canines used for detecting bombs and medicines are nonetheless steadily used, and full-body scanners have been dropped at airports after one other failed assault in December 2009, wherein a person tried to detonate explosives smuggled onto a airplane in his underwear.
Noem has instructed that DHS is reviewing some guidelines, however didn’t supply additional particulars.
Are these measures efficient or simply safety theatre?
Travellers have lengthy fumed about an ever-growing record of measures that may appear arbitrary and don’t at all times have a transparent utility.
Whereas the federal government argues that the will increase in airport safety mirror efforts to patch up vulnerabilities uncovered by the 9/11 hijackers and subsequent failed assaults, some specialists say that sure measures present the impression of safety greater than provable advantages.
“Persons are hesitant to push again towards new guidelines as a result of no one desires to be seen as accountable if there’s one other assault,” mentioned Stanley.
“Safety theatre has at all times been part of this, the place you make a giant present of safety with a view to give folks the impression of larger security.”
A TSA safety checkpoint in Pittsburgh Worldwide’s Landside terminal in Imperial, Pennsylvania, US on June 9, 2019 (Gene J Puskar/AP Photograph)
However imposing so many guidelines may be tough for company staff themselves, who’ve the industrial-scale process of screening round two million travellers per day.
A 2015 report from the company’s inspector basic discovered that TSA officers had didn’t detect weapons, explosives and different prohibited objects introduced by means of safety by undercover brokers to check the effectiveness of the system in 95 p.c of circumstances.
Regardless of such issues, TSA has continued to develop in dimension and scope annually. The company has a workforce of practically 63,000 folks and a finances that’s set to achieve greater than $11bn in 2025. In 2006, when “footwear off” was first applied, it was round $6bn.
What new applied sciences are being utilized in airport safety?
In her assertion, Noem mentioned that one of many causes that the “footwear off” coverage may very well be safely discarded is that “cutting-edge technological developments” have rendered it pointless.
One which travellers could have observed is the larger use of facial recognition know-how, a improvement some privateness advocates have seen with concern.
What are the privateness issues?
Petra Molnar, a lawyer and writer of the e book, The Partitions Have Eyes: Surviving Migration within the Age of Synthetic Intelligence, instructed Al Jazeera that in an period of heightening restrictions on motion, airports have turn out to be testing grounds for brand spanking new applied sciences, with civil liberties a largely secondary concern.
“With more and more extra digital applied sciences used at borders, airports have turn out to be epicentres of surveillance tech, with facial recognition and biometric applied sciences augmenting to bodily surveillance practices,” mentioned Molnar.
“Airports and borders are sometimes one of many first locations the place new surveillance applied sciences are examined out, usually with little regulation and oversight. Airports are the true testing grounds the place unregulated know-how experiments can run unchecked.”
Whereas the choice to scrap the “footwear off” coverage is a uncommon instance of airport safety measures being dialed again within the title of effectivity and comfort, it additionally comes at a time when these touring or returning to the US are more and more cautious of being pulled apart and questioned about their political beliefs on subjects reminiscent of Israel’s conflict in Gaza.
The administration of President Donald Trump lately warned, for instance, that worldwide college students getting into the US should make their social media profiles obtainable for inspection by authorities.
“The objective of safety measures must be to make sure that no one can get by means of this safety course of in the event that they pose a risk,” mentioned Stanley. “The issues begin when the federal government tries to classify folks by traits they imagine may make them a danger, and to try this, you could go into folks’s lives and discover out extra about them.”
