U.S. may change or get rid of liquid limit for carry-ons, U.S. Homeland Security secretary says
Article content
During a conference hosted by The Hill in Washington, Noem said on July 16 that she was 'questioning everything TSA (Transportation Security Administration) does' and hinted at potential revisions to the rules governing liquids in carry-on bags.
Article content
'The liquids, I'm questioning. So that may be the next big announcement, is what size your liquids need to be,' Noem said at the conference.
Article content
Her comments come about a week after she announced that passengers are no longer required to remove their shoes during regular TSA security checks, a change that went into effect immediately.
Article content
Here's what you need to know about Noem's comments about liquid restrictions in carry-on luggage and why the rule was implemented in the first place.
Article content
Article content
Article content
In 2006, authorities foiled a plan to use liquid explosives smuggled aboard carry-on luggage to blow up planes.
Article content
After the incident, the TSA banned all liquids in carry-on luggage. However, this ban was lifted after six weeks as it strained airline baggage systems, as more people were checking bags.
Article content
The FBI, along with other laboratories, found that a tiny amount of substances, those being small enough to fit into a quart-sized bag, could not blow up a plane. After that, the 3.4-ounce limit — or 3-1-1 rule — came into effect.
Article content
The rule stated that each container of liquid, gel or aerosol — whether it's water, shampoo or hairspray — must be 3.4 ounces (100 ml) or less, all containers must fit into one quart-sized (one-litre) clear zip-top bag, and only one bag is allowed per passenger. Since then, TSA checkpoints have borne the familiar rituals of chugging water and tossing oversized containers, and fights over what's considered a liquid or not.
Article content
Article content
After the restrictions were introduced in the U.S., other countries quickly followed suit with similar rules.
Article content
Article content
What does this mean for U.S. travellers?
Article content
For now, it is unclear how or when any changes to the liquid restrictions might take effect. Noem has not provided details on what a new policy could look like, whether that means lifting the size limit entirely, or just expanding it. Until then, passengers should expect to keep following the existing 3-1-1 rule.
Article content
The TSA has been exploring changes to its liquid rules for years, but with recent advancements in technology, it seems more possible than ever.
Article content
Advanced computed tomography (CT) scanners are now being installed at security checkpoints across U.S. airports. These scanners generate detailed 3D images of the contents of carry-on bags and can automatically detect potential security threats, making it possible to carry bigger sized liquids through security.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
24 minutes ago
- CBC
Trump threatens to hold up stadium deal if Washington Commanders don't revert to old name deemed offensive
President also voices desire for MLB's Cleveland Guardians to revert to old moniker Image | 1255944811 Caption: A hand-painted concrete barrier stands in the parking lot of Northwest Stadium — home of the NFL's Washington Commanders — in Landover, Maryland, in 2020, prior to the franchise's name and logo rebrand. () President Donald Trump is threatening to hold up a new stadium deal for Washington's NFL team if it does not restore its old name of the Redskins, which was considered offensive to Native Americans. Trump also said Sunday that he wants Cleveland's baseball team to revert to its former name, the Indians, saying there was a "big clamoring for this" as well. The Washington Commanders and Cleveland Guardians have had their current names since the 2022 seasons and both have said they have no plans to change them back. Trump said the Washington football team would be "much more valuable" if it restored its old name. "I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original `Washington Redskins,' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, `Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington," Trump said on his social media site. His latest interest in changing the name reflects his broader effort to roll back changes that followed a national debate on cultural sensitivity and racial justice. The team announced it would drop the Redskins name and the Indian head logo in 2020 during a broader reckoning with systemic racism and police brutality. The Commanders and the District of Columbia government announced a deal earlier this year to build a new home for the football team at the site the old RFK Stadium, the place the franchise called home for more than three decades. Trump's ability to hold up the deal remains to be seen. President Joe Biden signed a bill in January that transferred the land from the federal government to the District of Columbia. The provision was part of a short-term spending bill passed by Congress in December. While D.C. residents elect a mayor, a city council and commissioners to run day-to-day operations, Congress maintains control of the city's budget. Teams have quashed speculation of reverting Josh Harris, whose group bought the Commanders from former owner Dan Snyder in 2023, said earlier this year the name was here to stay. Not long after taking over, Harris quieted speculation about going back to Redskins, saying that would not happen. The team did not immediately respond to a request for comment following Trump's statement. The Washington team started in Boston as the Redskins in 1933 before moving to the nation's capital four years later. The Cleveland Guardians' president of baseball operations, Chris Antonetti, indicated before Sunday's game against the Athletics that there weren't any plans to revisit the name change. "We understand there are different perspectives on the decision we made a few years ago, but obviously it's a decision we made. We've got the opportunity to build a brand as the Guardians over the last four years and are excited about the future that's in front of us," he said. Cleveland announced in December 2020 it would drop Indians. It announced the switch to Guardians in July 2021. In 2018, the team phased out "Chief Wahoo" as its primary logo. The name changes had their share of supporters and critics as part of the national discussions about logos and names considered racist. Cleveland baseball team's name change sparks hopes other teams follow suit Trump posted Sunday afternoon that "The Owner of the Cleveland Baseball Team, Matt Dolan, who is very political, has lost three Elections in a row because of that ridiculous name change. What he doesn't understand is that if he changed the name back to the Cleveland Indians, he might actually win an Election. Indians are being treated very unfairly. MAKE INDIANS GREAT AGAIN (MIGA)!" Matt Dolan, the son of the late Larry Dolan, no longer has a role with the Guardians. He ran the team's charity endeavours until 2016. Matt Dolan was a candidate in the Ohio U.S. Senate elections in 2022 and '24, but lost. Washington and Cleveland share another thing in common. David Blitzer is a member of Harris' ownership group with the Commanders and holds a minority stake in the Guardians.
CBC
24 minutes ago
- CBC
Hogan says new cash benefit for departing ministers axed, in wake of CBC report
Premier John Hogan says his cabinet has met and decided to "immediately rescind" a new policy that provided outgoing ministers between $12,000 and $48,000 on their way out the door. In a post on Facebook late Friday afternoon, Hogan reiterated that he was not in cabinet and was not involved in the decision to approve the policy. The new benefit — which came into effect April 1 — was never publicly disclosed, until it was revealed by CBC News on Friday morning. "I became aware of the matter following inquiries from the media and acted quickly to revoke the allowance," Hogan noted in his Facebook post. The stunning reversal came 10 hours after CBC News broke the story about the new transitional allowance policy for ministers. It provided one month's salary for each year of service in cabinet, on a prorated basis, for a minimum of three months and a maximum of 12 months. The province's Executive Council declined to say when the decision was made, noting that it was a decision of cabinet and those deliberations are protected. On Thursday evening, a spokesperson for Hogan told CBC News that the premier was not in cabinet when the decision was made, and he was not involved in the decision. That statement sparked barbs from both opposition parties Friday. "I think that's a cop-out," Progressive Conservative Leader Tony Wakeham said in an interview early Friday afternoon. Wakeham called the allowance "another Liberal scandal," and said Hogan, as premier, would be well aware of a decision made by cabinet. "At a time in Newfoundland and Labrador when so many people are hurting with the cost of living, to see taxpayers dollars being secretly paid out to Liberal cabinet ministers and approved by their own ministers, this is scandalous," Wakeham said. NDP Leader Jim Dinn said the decision left him "shaking my head [in] disbelief," and recalling what he's heard while hosting town halls about affordability. "It shows a lack of sensitivity to the struggles that many people face in the province," Dinn said. "If you can make decisions like this, surely there are other things you can do just as easily to help people of the province who are struggling with cost of living." Both leaders spoke to CBC News before Hogan's Facebook post announcing the reversal of the benefit. Since April 1, when the now-rescinded policy came into effect, eight cabinet ministers have either already left or signalled their intentions to not run again when voters go to the polls in a looming provincial election. Hogan's statement on Facebook did not address whether the decision is retroactive, and how it would apply to any money already paid out.
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Republican senator says Trump's 51st state rhetoric not 'constructive' during Ottawa visit
A U.S. Republican senator says she doesn't think President Donald Trump's past comments about making Canada the 51st state are helpful as the two countries are locked in negotiations to reach some sort of trade agreement. Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski was in Ottawa as part of a bipartisan delegation meeting with Prime Minister Mark Carney on Monday morning. Speaking to reporters following the meeting, Murkowski was asked about Trump's taunts about Canada becoming part of the U.S. "I cannot explain President Trump's rhetoric about the 51st state. That is his statement [and] I think it has been made very, very clear that most view that as nothing more than a positioning statement… something to maybe agitate," she said. "I don't think that's constructive, quite honestly. Certainly here in Canada you can sense that there is a direct hostility, if you will, to that suggestion." Since his re-election in November, Trump has said multiple times that he wants to see Canada join the U.S. as its 51st state — though his rhetoric has cooled in recent weeks. Trump was asked about the idea of Canada joining the U.S. as he was leaving the G7 meeting in Alberta last month and said he still thinks the country should become a state. "I think it's a much better deal from Canada, but, you know, it's up to them," the president told reporters. WATCH | Trump asked about 51st state comments: Trump asked about 51st state comments, Canada's potential role in Golden Dome 1 month ago Trump and Carney have been in talks to reach a trade agreement after the U.S. slapped a series of tariffs on Canada earlier this year. Carney had set a deadline for an agreement to be reached a few times but has most recently pushed it back to Aug. 1. Murkowski was joined in Ottawa by Democratic senators Ron Wyden of Oregon, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire and Catherine Cortez Masto from Nevada. Carney briefly spoke to reporters, saying he had a "good meeting" with the U.S. delegation. The senators showed off Canada-U.S. friendship bracelets they wore into the meeting. "Four senators here, [from] both political parties, spent the morning working to build bridges, not throw wrenches," Wyden said of the trade talks. Wyden said he and his colleagues covered a number of topics with Carney, including Canada's digital services tax and softwood lumber. The federal government rescinded the tax on companies including Amazon, Google, Meta, Uber and Airbnb last month after Trump called for its removal. Wyden said Monday that he wants Canada to permanently kill the tax in legislation and suggested Carney was open to that idea. The Oregon senator also said he and his colleagues were pushing for a quota on Canadian softwood lumber exports to the U.S. "Softwood lumber is enormously important and we asked about how we could make progress on dealing with that issue," Wyden said. Carney says softwood quota is a possibility The prime minister suggested last week he is open to a trade agreement that includes quotas. "There is normally some element of managed trade that comes out of any agreement that comes there, it can include quotas, can include a variety of trade factors," Carney said. Softwood lumber has been a sticking point in Canada-U.S. relations for decades. The two countries have been without a softwood deal since 2015.
