A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, relating to civil penalties for unruly passengers of air carriers and to provide for the protection of employees providing air safety information, and for other purposes.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · May 26, 1999
Amends Federal aviation law to subject to a civil penalty of up to $25,000 any individual who interferes with the duties or responsibilities of the flight crew or cabin crew of a civil aircraft, or who poses an imminent threat to the safety of the aircraft or other individuals on the aircraft. Authorizes the Secretary of Transportation, in addition or as an alternative, to prohibit for not more than one year the individual from flying as a passenger on a civil aircraft. Requires the Secretary to notify all air carriers of the prohibition, including its term. Subjects to a civil penalty of up to $25,000 any air carrier which provides air transportation to an individual who has been prohibited from flying on a civil aircraft.(Sec. 2) Establishes a whistleblower protection program for airline employees providing air safety information.Prohibits air carriers, contractors, and subcontractors from discharging or otherwise discriminating against an employee as to pay, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because the employee: (1) is about to provide or has provided to the Federal Government information relating to any violation of a Federal Aviation Administration order, regulation, or standard, or any other Federal law relating to air carrier safety; or (2) is about to file or has filed a proceeding, or testified, or otherwise participated in a proceeding relating to such violations.Sets forth a Department of Labor complaint procedure for persons who believe they have been discharged or discriminated against in violation of this Act.Specifies civil penalties for violation of this Act.(Sec. 3) Establishes a program under which the Attorney General may deputize State and local law enforcement officers as Deputy U.S. Marshals for the limited purpose of enforcing Federal laws that regulate security on board aircraft, including laws relating to violent, abusive, or disruptive behavior by airline passengers. Provides for the training and law enforcement powers of such marshals.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.1139 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1139 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1139 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1139 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.