Supreme Court rules unanimously in Tanzin v. Tanvir that Muslim men placed on No Fly List after refusing to inform on mosques can seek damages
On December 10, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously (8-0, Justice Thomas writing) in Tanzin v. Tanvir that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act permits money-damages suits against federal officials in their individual capacities. The plaintiffs — Muhammad Tanvir, Jameel Algibhah, and Naveed Shinwari — alleged they were placed or kept on the No Fly List in retaliation for refusing to act as FBI informants in Muslim communities. On remand in 2023, the FBI agents were granted qualified immunity, a ruling affirmed by the Second Circuit in October 2024.
Dates: FBI approaches 2007–2013; suit filed October 1, 2013; Second Circuit reversal of dismissal July 23, 2018 (894 F.3d 449); SCOTUS decision December 10, 2020; qualified immunity granted on remand February 24, 2023; Second Circuit affirmance October 29, 2024. Parties: Muhammad Tanvir; Jameel Algibhah; Naveed Shinwari; Center for Constitutional Rights; CUNY CLEAR; Federal Bureau of Investigation officers (named defendants); U.S. Supreme Court. What happened: Three American Muslim men were separately approached by FBI agents seeking to recruit them as informants to surveil mosques and acquaintances. Each refused. Each was subsequently placed (or kept) on the No Fly List, with Tanvir losing his trucking job and Algibhah and Shinwari unable to fly to family. The Supreme Court held RFRA's 'appropriate relief' includes money damages against individual officers. Government's stated reasons: Listings never officially disclosed. Plaintiffs' allegations: Coercive use of the No Fly List to pressure religious-community informants; substantial burden on religious exercise in violation of RFRA. Outcome: Landmark unanimous SCOTUS ruling on RFRA damages. On remand, agents were granted qualified immunity because no prior precedent had clearly established the violation; affirmed in 2024. Plaintiffs received no monetary recovery.