Topline
A California Senate committee approved a bill last night that would significantly restrict Clear, a company that allows travelers to pay to skip part of the TSA line at airports—backing off an outright ban on the controversial security company, but still preventing it from expanding to more airports in the Golden State.
Key Facts
The bill, known as S.B. 1372, passed California’s Senate Transportation Committee on Tuesday night with bipartisan support, after Sen. Josh Newman, D-Fullerton, Sen. Janet Nguyen, R-Huntington Beach, criticized the company for creating a “two-tiered system” at airports.
For $189 per year, Clear allows customers to skip the TSA line after confirming their identity with biometric data, like a fingerprint or retina scan, but Clear users can still be randomly selected for additional screenings by TSA agents.
Although the original bill would have banned all third-party vendors from operating security screenings, the amended bill that passed through the committee on Tuesday only bans them from entering any new contracts with California airports.
In a statement on Tuesday, Newman said the bill will encourage Clear to “operate separate lines for subscribers” and open separate screening lanes for their customers so they would no longer be cutting the line, a move he said would eliminate “the friction and frustration created by the current system.”
Clear operates in more than 55 airports nationwide, including at Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose and San Diego International Airports, and claims to have over 18 million verified users.
Clear did not return a request for comment from Forbes.
Key Background
On Monday, Newman introduced S.B. 1372 to the Transportation Committee—the first bill in the nation to ban or place restrictions on third-party companies conducting security screenings at American airports. Newman criticized the company for creating a “two-tiered” system that created an “inconvenience and annoyance of travelers making their way through the security queue.” Nguyen, his Republican colleague also representing parts of Orange County, agreed with his assessment. “It becomes a haves vs. have nots where those who can afford it jump in front of the rest of us. They even cut in front of TSA Pre-boarding pass travelers who have been screened by the TSA,” Nguyen told Politico after the bill was introduced to committee.
Why Is Clear Controversial?
Clear has also raised security concerns within the TSA, which operates its own expedited screening service with TSA PreCheck. “Unlike TSA PreCheck, which involves a background check and enhanced pre-screening protocols, expedited screening services offer faster passage through security for a membership fee without PreCheck’s associated security enhancements,” Newman said in a statement. Clear has been involved in several security incidents over the last year that have raised concerns. In February 2023, a Clear customer was escorted through security without presenting their ID, using a boarding pass they found in a nearby trash can. In another incident in July, a Clear user was able to pass security and walk onto a flight while carrying ammunition, Bloomberg reported. Despite the repeated incidents, Clear has pushed back against TSA plans to require more vetting for its customers.
Contra
A group of directors at several major airlines, including Delta, United, Southwest and Alaska Airlines wrote a joint letter, which was later published by Politico, to the Transportation Committee opposing the bill, which they claimed would increase flight costs for travelers and “severely restricts airports’ ability to effectively manage lines at the security checkpoint.” However, the American Federation of Government Employees Local 1230, a union that represents 1200 TSA workers in the San Francisco Bay Area, supported the bill. The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA also wrote in support of the bill, which they called “a pay-for-play way to cut the screening line.” The unions and air carriers did not immediately return requests for comment from Forbes.
