On Thursday, December 18, 2025, Evita Duffy-Alfonso, daughter of U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, found herself at the center of a heated debate over airport security and civil liberties. After refusing a body scan at a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) checkpoint due to her pregnancy and concerns about radiation exposure, Duffy-Alfonso endured what she described as an "absurdly invasive" pat-down—a process that left her frustrated, nearly late for her flight, and determined to make her experience public.
Her story, shared across multiple posts on the social platform X, quickly caught fire, sparking renewed scrutiny of the TSA's procedures and the broader question of how much Americans are willing to sacrifice for safety at the airport. According to Fox News Digital, Duffy-Alfonso recounted, "I nearly missed my flight this morning after the TSA made me wait 15 minutes for a pat-down because I’m pregnant and didn’t feel like getting radiation exposure from their body scanner. The agents were passive-aggressive, rude, and tried to pressure me and another pregnant woman into just walking through the scanner because it’s ‘safe.’ After finally getting the absurdly invasive pat-down, I barely made my flight. All this for an unconstitutional agency that isn’t even good at its job."
Her frustration didn’t end there. In another post, Duffy-Alfonso declared, "TSA = unreasonable, warrantless searches of passengers and their property. That means it violates the Fourth Amendment and is therefore unconstitutional. Pls abolish," directly tagging President Donald Trump and Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem. This wasn’t the first time she’d voiced such views—back in June, she argued on social media that the TSA "needs to be abolished" for violating constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Duffy-Alfonso’s criticism wasn’t just aimed at the TSA’s procedures. She raised broader concerns about the direction of American travel security, writing, "Perhaps things would have gone more smoothly if I’d handed over my biometric data to a random private company (CLEAR). Then I could enjoy the special privilege of waiting in a shorter line to be treated like a terrorist in my own country. Is this freedom? Travel, brought to you by George Orwell — and the privilege of convenience based solely on your willingness to surrender biometric data and submit to radiation exposure? The ‘golden age of transportation’ cannot begin until the TSA is gone."
Her remarks have resonated with many travelers who share frustrations over long lines, intrusive procedures, and what some see as a lack of common sense in airport security. Yet, the TSA and its defenders point out that the agency was born out of necessity. Established in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the TSA’s mission is to prevent weapons and explosives from making their way onto planes—a task that, by its very nature, demands vigilance and, sometimes, inconvenience.
According to The New York Times, the TSA maintains that all screening equipment, including metal detectors and body scanners, is safe for pregnant travelers. The body scanners, which use millimeter wave technology, emit radio waves—not X-rays—and, as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes, this technology emits far less energy than a cellphone. Still, the agency allows passengers to opt out of the scanner in favor of a physical pat-down, which, as Duffy-Alfonso and others have discovered, can be a lengthy and uncomfortable process.
The TSA responded to Duffy-Alfonso’s complaints with a statement acknowledging the incident: "TSA takes complaints about airport security screening procedures seriously and investigates complaints thoroughly to ensure the correct procedures are applied." The Department of Homeland Security echoed this response, but the Department of Transportation, led by Sean Duffy, declined to comment on the matter.
There’s an added wrinkle to the story: the tangled web of authority and responsibility in the world of transportation security. While Sean Duffy, as Transportation Secretary, oversees federal transportation projects and sets safety regulations for air travel, he does not control the TSA. That agency falls under the Department of Homeland Security, currently led by Kristi Noem. Duffy-Alfonso herself noted this in a post, but asserted that if the TSA were under her father's purview, "he’d radically limit it and lobby Congress to abolish it."
Sean Duffy, who was sworn in as Transportation Secretary on January 29, 2025, has championed what he calls the "golden age of travel," encouraging Americans to dress better and embrace a more refined travel experience. Duffy-Alfonso referenced this campaign in her criticism, arguing, "The ‘golden age of transportation’ cannot begin until the TSA is gone."
Despite her harsh criticism of the TSA, Duffy-Alfonso made it clear that she supports President Trump and Secretary Noem’s efforts to secure America’s borders. "To be clear, I am 100% behind all that @POTUS & @DHS has done to keep out terrorists and illegals, especially at the border. In fact, President Trump & @Sec_Noem aren’t getting enough credit for achieving zero illegal border crossings and stopping deranged terrorists from coming into the U.S.," she wrote. But she added, "There needs to be more common sense around how we treat Americans exercising their right to travel. And I hope TSA works on improving their treatment of expectant mothers who don’t want to go through body scanners to protect their unborn children. We can do both."
Her experience shines a spotlight on the delicate balance between security and civil liberties, a debate that’s been simmering since the TSA’s creation. Before 9/11, airport security was handled by private contractors and was, by most accounts, much less intrusive. The TSA was created to restore public confidence in air travel and prevent future attacks, but over the years, its procedures have drawn criticism for being overly burdensome and, some argue, ineffective.
This year, the TSA has made several changes to its screening process, including allowing all travelers to keep their shoes on and requiring Real ID-compliant documents for domestic flights. The agency also notes that passengers can request a private screening as an alternative to the body scanner. Still, as Duffy-Alfonso’s experience shows, the process can be far from smooth, especially for those with medical or personal concerns.
For many Americans, Duffy-Alfonso’s story is a familiar one—a reminder that the quest for security can sometimes come at the expense of dignity and convenience. Whether her call to abolish the TSA gains traction remains to be seen, but her experience has sparked a conversation that shows no signs of fading. As travelers continue to navigate the ever-changing landscape of airport security, one thing is clear: the debate over how to balance safety, privacy, and common sense is far from over.