If it depends on consent, it doesn't have to be reasonable. Reasonableness, consent, and a warrant; you only need one to justify a search.
And no, the search doesn't mean "we're going to presume that you're doing or carrying something that indicates criminality", any more than does the security search when getting on a plane, or the customs search when getting off. There's no presumption of guilt; what they're saying is that "we're almost certain you're not carrying anything you shouldn't be, but we can't be 100% sure, and the combined burden on all the innocent people we search is smaller than the harm that will be done if we don't find the one person who is carrying a bomb or something".
In any case, I think the constitutional test of reasonableness depends on the nature of the search, and the general circumstances, rather than any suspicion they may have of you in particular.
And no, you aren't entitled to use the subway. It's private property (well, government property), and the MTA is entitled to exclude anyone whom the law allows it to exclude. That's why it can exclude you if don't consent to pay your $2; and by the same logic it can exclude you if you don't consent to a search of your bag, or any other condition the Powers That Be decide is appropriate to impose. (Except that, as a government entity, they can't be completely arbitrary, or discriminate against particular viewpoints; so they can ban all T-shirts, if they come up with a plausible justification, but they can't ban only T-shirts with particular words printed on them, while allowing shirts that are identical except for not having have those words.)
I agree that it's probably not going to make anyone safer, and is therefore not only a massive inconvenience but also a waste of police resources. But that's the NYPD's and MTA's decision to make, not mine or yours.
no subject
And no, the search doesn't mean "we're going to presume that you're doing or carrying something that indicates criminality", any more than does the security search when getting on a plane, or the customs search when getting off. There's no presumption of guilt; what they're saying is that "we're almost certain you're not carrying anything you shouldn't be, but we can't be 100% sure, and the combined burden on all the innocent people we search is smaller than the harm that will be done if we don't find the one person who is carrying a bomb or something".
In any case, I think the constitutional test of reasonableness depends on the nature of the search, and the general circumstances, rather than any suspicion they may have of you in particular.
And no, you aren't entitled to use the subway. It's private property (well, government property), and the MTA is entitled to exclude anyone whom the law allows it to exclude. That's why it can exclude you if don't consent to pay your $2; and by the same logic it can exclude you if you don't consent to a search of your bag, or any other condition the Powers That Be decide is appropriate to impose. (Except that, as a government entity, they can't be completely arbitrary, or discriminate against particular viewpoints; so they can ban all T-shirts, if they come up with a plausible justification, but they can't ban only T-shirts with particular words printed on them, while allowing shirts that are identical except for not having have those words.)
I agree that it's probably not going to make anyone safer, and is therefore not only a massive inconvenience but also a waste of police resources. But that's the NYPD's and MTA's decision to make, not mine or yours.