Decision means plaintiffs will have their day in court, nearly 20 years later.
SEATTLE – Today, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of three Muslim Americans – Sheikh Yassir Fazaga, Ali Malik and Yasser AbdelRahim – plaintiffs in FBI v Fazaga, reversing an earlier dismissal of the case to hold the FBI accountable for violating their religious freedom.
“Nearly two decades ago, the FBI sent an informant to Orange County to surveil and harass our sacred community,” said Sheikh Yassir Fazaga, plaintiff and former imam of the Orange County Islamic Foundation. “Ali, Yasser and I decided to fight back, and after today’s ruling, we will have the courthouse doors finally opened to us. We and the thousands of Muslims whom the FBI targeted simply for praying in mosques deserve justice.”
FBI v Fazaga began in February 2011, after an informant shared that the FBI was surreptitiously surveilling mosques in Orange County under a secret government operation in 2006 and 2007. Based on sworn statements by the informant, the operation was designed to collect information about Muslims who attended mosques in the region, regardless of any suspicion of wrongdoing.
“Today, the Ninth Circuit said that the government does not get a free pass out of wrongdoing simply by shouting ‘national security’,” said Mohammad Tajsar, senior staff attorney at the ACLU SoCal. “Today’s victory ensures our clients will get their day in court.”
After the plaintiffs filed suit, the government moved to dismiss the case by asserting the "state-secrets" privilege, arguing that merely defending the case in court would threaten the disclosure of information sensitive to our national security. The district court agreed and dismissed most of the suit on that basis.
“Today’s ruling establishes important protections against abuse by the government,” said Ahilan Arulanantham, faculty co-director of the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law. “Finally, nearly twenty years after the government spied on our clients because of their religion, we can look forward to vindicating their constitutional rights in court.”
The plaintiffs in this case are represented by the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, the Center for Immigration Law and Policy at UCLA School of Law, the Greater Los Angeles Area office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-LA), and Hadsell Stormer Renick & Dai LLP. Arguing for plaintiffs before the Ninth Circuit last June was Peter Bibring, former ACLU SoCal senior counsel.
“This ruling is a powerful reminder that the government cannot simply hide behind state secrets to avoid accountability for unconstitutional surveillance,” said Dina Chehata, civil rights managing attorney at CAIR-LA. “No government agency is above the law, and targeting individuals for their faith has no place in our democracy.”
Read the Ninth Circuit ruling: https://www.aclusocal.org/sites/default/files/12-56867.pdf