Not really sure if they are constitutional. I don't think the constitutions covers all the technology we have now, compared to when the constitution was first written. Either way, it sure beats having another tragedy like we had on September 11th. People need to offer up other ideas to keep us safe, if they do not like the full body scanners.
full body scanners are constitutional when appropriately placed and used. if a private business requests a full body scan to enter their premise or to conduct business with them, you can either walk thru or turn around. So that would make it a consensual search. public building are a different story and would need to categorized based on security needs. ie airport, courthouse and not public works
The use of full-body scanners by the TSA at US airports is not a violation of the constitutional protections against unreasonable search and seizure. The TSA can demonstrate a compelling interest in using the devices to screen everyone boarding entering an airport's secure area. However just because they are constitutional does not make their use good public policy.
Yes, full body scanners that are usually seen in airports seem to be constitutional. While they are controversial and highly disliked, the fact is people do not have to fly. They always have the chance to travel by other means. Airports take certain security measures, and no matter how controversial these measures are, people do not have to be subject to them. All they have to do is travel by alternate means.
No, full-body scanners are not constitutional in the United States, because the people who are subject to them have not done anything wrong. It is unconstitutional to have a government check point anywhere in the United States. Airport security needs to be left to each local airport, not under the branch of the government.