> What if they have illegal evidence that you’re dangerous and can’t arrest you because it wouldn’t hold up?
Then they shouldn't have resorted to illegal means to gain that evidence. Using it to prevent someone from flying or to subject them to "advanced screening" is no more justifiable than using it in court.
> What if they’re not ready to arrest because they think you might lead them to people higher up in your organization?
They would share responsibility for whatever additional crimes you end up committing in the meantime because they failed to act on the evidence which they had. Until they actually bring the matter up in court, however, you remain a free citizen and ought not be subjected to special restrictions or mistreatment without a trial on the basis of secret evidence.
Then they shouldn't have resorted to illegal means to gain that evidence. Using it to prevent someone from flying or to subject them to "advanced screening" is no more justifiable than using it in court.
> What if they’re not ready to arrest because they think you might lead them to people higher up in your organization?
They would share responsibility for whatever additional crimes you end up committing in the meantime because they failed to act on the evidence which they had. Until they actually bring the matter up in court, however, you remain a free citizen and ought not be subjected to special restrictions or mistreatment without a trial on the basis of secret evidence.