Editing El Al (section)

===Security controversy and passenger profiling===

The airline was criticized by Hungarian courts for refusing to search luggage with the passenger present, acting against Hungarian domestic laws stipulating that only authorized officials are able to undertake such searches.<ref name="ArabReport">{{cite web | url=http://www.no-racism.org/arabic/data/publications/AirportReportEnglish.pdf | title=Suspected Citizens: Racial Profiling Against Arab and non Jewish Passengers by Israeli Airlines and Airports | last=Tarek | first=Ibrahim | date=December 2006 | access-date=2007-03-01 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070628111608/http://www.no-racism.org/arabic/data/publications/AirportReportEnglish.pdf | archive-date=2007-06-28 | url-status=dead }}</ref>

In 2008, a civil case was brought to the [[Supreme Court of Israel]] by the [[Association for Civil Rights in Israel]], which alleged that El Al's practice of [[Racial profiling|ethnic profiling]] illegally singled out Arab passengers for tougher treatment.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.haaretz.com/rights-group-says-airport-s-racial-profiling-violates-israeli-law-1.241906|title=Rights Group Says Airport's Racial Profiling Violates Israeli Law|agency=Associated Press|website=Haaretz|date=March 20, 2008}}</ref> The group had petitioned "for the complete elimination of racial profiling" by the airline.<ref name="Bob">{{Cite web |last=Bob |first=Yonah Jeremy |date=2015-03-11 |title=High Court rules on racial profiling at Ben-Gurion Airport |url=https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/high-court-rules-on-racial-profiling-at-ben-gurion-airport-393592 |access-date=2024-06-18 |website=The Jerusalem Post}}</ref> In 2015, the court dismissed the petition on procedural grounds, accepting in part the government's argument "that it could not completely change without heavily burdening all travelers," but reimbursing the Association for Civil Rights in Israel a total of [[Israeli new shekel|NIS]] 30,000 for its legal fees, and finding that the petition "had already gotten security to be less discriminatory."<ref name="Bob"/> The court left the door open for a renewed petition in the future if required.<ref name="Bob"/>