Supreme Court rules for Muslim men seeking damages for alleged no-fly-list retaliation
Image from Shutterstock.com.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Thursday that federal officials can be liable for money damages in their individual capacities for violations of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the unanimous opinion in the case of three Muslim men who say they were placed on the no-fly list for refusing to spy on their religious communities. Justice Amy Coney Barrett did not take part in the decision.
The plaintiffs in the case are Muhammad Tanvir, Jameel Algibhah and Naveed Shinwar. They claimed that their placement on the no-fly list cost them money from wasted airline tickets and from job opportunities lost.
Supreme Court rules Muslim men put on no-fly list can sue FBI agents
azcentral.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from azcentral.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
Agents May Owe Damages for No-Fly-List Decisions, Supreme Court Says
courthousenews.com - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from courthousenews.com Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
The United States Supreme Court has ruled that three Muslim men can sue several FBI agents whom they accuse of placing them on the government’s “no-fly list” because they refused to become informants.
In an 8-0 decision on Thursday, the justices upheld a lower court ruling allowing the men, all US citizens or permanent residents who were born abroad, to sue for monetary damages under a 1993 federal law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
The case, which began in 2013, involves New York City residents Muhammad Tanvir and Jameel Algibhah and Connecticut resident Naveed Shinwari.
They said they refused an alleged request by FBI agents to spy on Muslim communities in the US, arguing that doing so would have violated their religious beliefs.