When a number of practicing Muslims in the New York City area refused to become confidential informants for the FBI, they were placed on the No Fly List. Though the FBI eventually removed them from the list, these Muslims are suing for money damages for alleged infringement on their First Amendment rights.
Do money damages constitute “appropriate relief” under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993? Can federal officials be sued for money damages under RFRA? Tim Schultz of the 1st Amendment Partnership explains how strict scrutiny, ambiguity, and religious liberty play into FNU Tanzin v. Tanvir. Oral argument is October 6, 2020.
Learn more about Tim Schultz:
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Related Links & Differing Views:
ABA Journal: “Supreme Court to consider whether FBI agents can be sued for money damages for religious freedom violation”
The First Amendment Encyclopedia: “Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (1993)”
The Federalist Society: “Is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) the Future of Religious Liberty?”
Journal of Constitutional Law: “The Religious Freedom Restoration Act Is Unconstitutional, Period”
Michigan Law Review: “How to Apply the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to Federal Law Without Violating the Constitution”
Vox: “A heartbreaking Supreme Court case could be a huge win for the Christian right”