( CNN ) You 're late for your flight , sweaty from having dragged your luggage to the check-in counter , and stressed about making it through security before boarding begins . For some of us , this is the rule , not the exception . For most of us , it 's a pretty unremarkable scenario . Not so fast , says the Transportation Security Administration . Typical airport behavior like this could make you a suspicious traveler who should be subjected to questioning and additional screening -- and possibly referred to the police for investigation , detention or arrest . That should seem far-fetched , but it is n't . The TSA continues to use pseudo-scientific `` behavior detection '' techniques that have given rise to persistent allegations of racial and ethnic profiling at our nation 's airports . Through a program called Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques , or SPOT , the TSA employs thousands of `` behavior detection officers '' who scrutinize travelers to look for signs of `` mal-intent '' in airport screening areas . The officers typically spend less than 30 seconds scanning an average passenger for over 90 behaviors the TSA associates with stress , fear or deception . When the officers perceive clusters of such behaviors in any given individual , they refer that person for secondary inspection and questioning . The SPOT program relies on theories about `` micro-expressions , '' involuntary facial expressions that supposedly appear for milliseconds despite one 's efforts to conceal them . Behavior detection officers look for such micro-expressions while scanning passengers ' faces or engaging in casual conversation with them . It 's as nutty as it sounds . Setting aside that the officers ' perception of these behaviors is inherently subjective , there 's just no evidence that deception or `` mal-intent '' can reliably be detected through observation , especially in an unstructured setting like an airport screening area . The fact that many people find such settings inherently stressful only compounds the problem . If TSA 's behavior detection officers look for stress in a stressful environment , they 're going to find it , along with plenty of false positives . Just about everyone outside the TSA who has reviewed the SPOT program has decided that it 's unscientific and a waste of money . An exhaustive review by the Government Accountability Office found the SPOT program lacked a scientific basis , that the behavioral indicators it relied on were subjective , and that the TSA had no effective means to test its effectiveness . In no uncertain terms , the GAO recommended that Congress curtail funding for the program . An independent scientific advisory group that reviewed the SPOT program also concluded that `` no scientific evidence exists to support the detection or inference of future behavior , including intent . '' And during a congressional hearing on the program , Republican Rep. Richard Hudson of North Carolina observed , `` To my knowledge , there has not been a single instance where a behavior detection officer has referred someone to a law enforcement officer and that individual turned out to be a terrorist . '' Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas , the Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee , stated , `` I am concerned that TSA will continue to spin its wheels with this program instead of developing a more effective and efficient approach . '' Despite this withering criticism , SPOT remains in place and has cost taxpayers well over $ 1 billion ( that 's with a b ) since its inception in 2007 . Repeat : over a billion dollars on a misguided program that does n't work . Equally troubling is that SPOT has given rise to persistent allegations of racial and ethnic profiling -- an unfortunately inevitable result when law enforcement or border agents single people out based on hasty , gut-level judgments about them . Allegations of profiling by behavior detection officers have come not only from travelers , but also from numerous other officers . Over 30 behavior detection officers at Boston Logan International Airport said that profiling was rampant there . One of the officers told reporters , `` They just pull aside anyone who they do n't like the way they look -- if they are black and have expensive clothes or jewelry , or if they are Hispanic . '' Another officer submitted an anonymous complaint saying , `` The behavior detection program is no longer a behavior-based program , but it is a racial profiling program . '' The TSA has not revealed what , if any , steps it has taken to ensure that unlawful profiling does not occur in airport screening . Nor has TSA explained why -- despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary -- SPOT contributes meaningfully to aviation security . That 's why the ACLU submitted an FOIA request to TSA seeking information on its use of behavior detection . We 've received no response , so we 're taking the TSA to court to get the information the public needs to fully evaluate it . People expect that when they travel , they will be screened for weapons or explosives that could bring down an airplane . They do n't expect -- nor should they -- that officers will make probing judgments about their intentions based on little more than their facial expressions , or that they will be stopped , questioned and perhaps even searched because of their race or ethnicity . It 's time for TSA to explain and justify the SPOT program . Or better yet , listen to those who say it 's a waste of money and scrap it entirely .
SPOT 's TSA program screens passengers for `` micro-expressions '' to determine if a person is suspicious . Hugh Handeyside : TSA program is unscientific , has wasted over $ 1 billion of taxpayer money and should be terminated .