No, the suspension of habeas corpus was happening to terror suspects, even United States citizens. IF you arrest a citizen of the United States they are accorded a fair and speedy trial and the right of habeas corpus, or show us the body. It doesn't matter what crime they are accused of the same rules apply, as set down in the Constitution. And the Patriot Act seems pretty close to warrantless searches. The President's domestic spying program definately applies as warrantless since they aren't even using FISA warrants. Which I feel are already a little scary since they involve secret courts issuing secret warrants. But I'm digressing onto the thin ice of politics (only to clarify what I meant though).
I haven't read the case law as it applies to airport searches, but I think this is an administrative search (?) which means they are searching everyone or selecting people at random to be searched (correct me if that isn't the right category). Its similar to a road block where they search every vehicle such as in pursuit of a fugitive or at a border crossing. They can only be challenged if they are specifically targeting individuals without truely being random and without probable cause.
I don't have an issue with people being scanned at airports, this is an improvement I feel would actually improve security in a meaningful way. I just have to shake my head in wonder at the disparity in reactions people have about their privacy on some issues and not others and their security on some issues and not others. Refering of course to the few prudes who made enough fuss to completely over shadow the security and cost issues with questions of voyeurism.
_________________________
A gentleman should always be able to break his fast in the manner of a gentleman where so ever he may find himself.--Good Omens