Preview

On Thursday, the CUNY-CLEAR,[1] led by Professor Ramzi Kassem, won an important decision from the United States Supreme Court in Tanzin v. Tanvir. The plaintiffs in Tanzin are three Muslim men. The men allege that they were placed on the “No Fly List” as suspected terrorists in retaliation for refusing to serve as informants for the FBI. Upholding the early decision of the Second Circuit, the U.S. Supreme Court found unanimously that the men were entitled to seek money damages against individual FBI agents for wrongful interference with their religious practices, under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (“RFRA”). You can learn more about the case on CLCMA’s website.

This U.S. Supreme Court decision is important for several reasons. First, this is the second time in five years that the U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously determined that statutes protecting religious discrimination extend protections to Muslims. The time first occurred in the case of Holt v. Hobbs, wherein the U.S. Supreme Court found that state prison officials’ prohibition of facial hair for a Muslim prisoner violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (“RLUIPA”). The fact that the U.S. Supreme Court has considered two separate cases on this issue in five years is, in and of itself, evidence of the unfortunate widespread practices of religious discrimination by government officials against Muslims, under the guise of security measures. The U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Tanzin sends a strong signal that the federal courts should not simply continue to acquiesce to the government’s use of the national security label to justify religious discrimination.

Second, this decision demonstrates the importance of courage. Each of the plaintiffs in this case deserves our respect and gratitude. They individually were willing to stand up in a public forum and acknowledge that the FBI had labeled them as suspected terrorists, and explain why. That takes courage. Many will not read past “suspected terrorist”, but these men had the courage to tell their stories so that what happened to them will not happen to others.

Third, while this decision does not put an end to the No Fly List, nor does this decision put an end to the FBI’s coercive tactics, what it does do is give those of us involved in the struggle to end these tactics another tool to use in the courtroom. But like all tools, if it not used, it is of no value. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision means that the Tanzin plaintiffs are headed back to the district court to pursue their claims. They have not won yet, but with Professor Kassem’s advocacy, and with God’s help, We trust they will.

At MLFA, through your support and funding of CLCMA, we too have been engaged for the last five years in litigation against the coercive and unlawful use of the No Fly List by the FBI. CLCMA's clients, like the plaintiffs in Tanzin, have frequently been removed from the No Fly List shortly before they could finally have a hearing in court. Now we, too, look forward to putting the Tanzin decision to use in court. To do that, we are going to need the help of the community. Without clients coming forward, we cannot bring the suits necessary to stop these practices. If you are on the No Fly List or have otherwise been retaliated against by the FBI or other government officials, we want to hear from you. You can request our assistance by clicking here.

[1] City University of New York (“CUNY”) Law School’s clinic - Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility (“CLEAR”).