Or, at the least, pretty hot.
These damn things give me the creeps, the "backscatter, full-body x-rays" employed by the TSA. There is absolutely no discernible reason for using these, much less the punitive sexual assault by private, TSA employees when one refuses to be fully irradiated.
The boo-birds have chirped in on this one ad nauseum. However, the best explanation, for the layman and lawya's, is Jeffrey Rosen's Op-Ed in the WaPo on Sunday.
FWIW, I think he nails the "tailoring prong" on this perfectly. The below excerpt pretty much sums up the argument, but the entire piece is worth your read.
Courts evaluating airport-screening technology tend to give great deference to the government's national security interest in preventing terrorist attacks. But in this case, there's a strong argument that the TSA's measures violate the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.
Although the Supreme Court hasn't evaluated airport screening technology, lower courts have emphasized, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled in 2007, that "a particular airport security screening search is constitutionally reasonable provided that it 'is no more extensive nor intensive than necessary, in the light of current technology, to detect the presence of weapons or explosives.'
BTW: Sorry these are coming out a day or two late, but after 8 days off, I absolutely got hammered back at the office...and not in that "holy shit, my paralegal is really hot and wore me out" sort of hammering. Alas.