| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Land of the Free |
| Supreme Court Puts Agents on Financial Hook for Religious Freedom Violations |
| 2020-12-12 |
| [FreeBeacon] The Supreme Court said Thursday that federal agents can be forced to pay out of their own pocket for religious liberty violations. The decision allows three Moslem men to seek monetary damages from FBI agents who allegedly placed them on the no-fly list as retaliation for turning down requests to become informants. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. "This is a good decision that makes it easier to hold the government accountable when it violates Americans' religious liberties," said Lori Windham of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which filed a brief supporting the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs in Thursday's case, Muhammad Tanvir, Jameel Algibhah, and Naveed Shinwari, are Moslem citizens or green card holders who say FBI special agents attempted to recruit them as informants in the New York City area and abroad. For example, Algibhah alleges that agents asked him to attend particular mosques, behave like an bad boy, and engage on online Islamic forums. All three men refused, citing their Moslem faith. They said informing amounts to bearing false witness, worshiping under false pretenses, and betraying the trust of fellow Moslems. A short time later, the agents added them to the no-fly list. "The agents relied upon what they assumed would be the irresistible coercion of the no fly list—causing each [plaintiff] to be placed on the list and then either threatening to keep him on the list for refusing to accede to the FBI's demands, or offering the incentive of being removed from the list in exchange for services as an FBI informant," the plaintiffs' lawyers wrote in a brief to the justices. In turn, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). Though their names have since been removed from the list, they are still seeking monetary compensation directly from the agents responsible. The men want to recoup the cost of wasted plane tickets or job opportunities lost due to their inability to travel. Tanvir couldn't obtain a full refund from his airline after he had to cancel a trip to visit his ailing mother in Pakistain. The Trump administration opposed the plaintiffs before the justices. In court papers, the Justice Department said the plaintiffs can only sue the agents in their official capacities, meaning the government would cover the cost of any financial judgment against them. RFRA says plaintiffs can seek damages "against a government," not individuals, the DOJ argued. They also warned that putting agents on the hook for their mistakes or abuses would badly affect split-second national security decisions. In his opinion for the Court, Thomas said RFRA's text creates an expansive definition of "government" that covers individual officials. "A ’government,' under RFRA, extends beyond the term's plain meaning to include officials," Thomas wrote. "And the term ’official' does not refer solely to an office, but rather to the actual person ’who is invested with an office.'" The decision also noted that qualified immunity is available as a defense against such lawsuits, which could blunt the practical impact of Thursday's decision. The case is No. 19-71 Tanzin v. Tanvir. Related: Supreme Court: 2020-12-11 Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam provides instruction on how to prey Supreme Court: 2020-12-11 Supreme Court Flooded with Filings in Texas Challenge to Voting Procedures Supreme Court: 2020-12-10 Texas requests Supreme Court to overturn Biden win Related: Religious Freedom Restoration Act: 2020-07-11 Joe Biden Says He Would Rescind Exemption for Little Sisters of the Poor Religious Freedom Restoration Act: 2020-02-05 'Federal Black Robed Tyrant Reverses Conviction of Border Volunteers, Challenging Govt's 'Gruesome Logic' Religious Freedom Restoration Act: 2019-10-16 Federal judge overturns ObamaCare transgender protections |
| Posted by:trailing wife |
| #6 We should be grateful for Justice Thomas! |
| Posted by: Sgt. D.T. 2020-12-12 18:14 |
| #5 So if you need a little extra cash convert to Islam. Then do something to get on the no-fly list. |
| Posted by: jpal 2020-12-12 14:40 |
| #4 Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Once again, the FBI at it again. I could care less that the chaps are Muslim. To summarily put them on a no-fly list because they wouldn't play with the Bureau is simply disgusting. That is justice. For once. |
| Posted by: Clem 2020-12-12 10:12 |
| #3 ^ No. Any more questions? |
| Posted by: Rupert Ghibelline4825 2020-12-12 09:10 |
| #2 Yes. I hate to be cynical, but will this ruling also apply to federal agents who discriminate or retaliate against Christians and Jews? |
| Posted by: Tom 2020-12-12 08:56 |
| #1 Expect a lot of 'I was obeying orders' when this hits the anti-Christians. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2020-12-12 00:38 |