Shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the U.S. government allowed law enforcement officials to arrest people of “high interest” according to race, religion, or national origin, according to Javaid Iqbal, a Pakistani citizen who was placed in a maximum-security prison in early 2002.
Iqbal claimed that the government’s decision violated his civil rights and he sued former U.S. Attorney General John Aschcroft and Robert Mueller, then-Director of the FBI.
Today, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Justice Kennedy, ruled against Iqbal.
Kennedy wrote that Iqbal’s initial filings did not provide enough information to automatically find Ashcroft and Mueller responsible for the abuses he suffered while being held.
The case will now return to the lower courts, where Iqbal may have a chance to substantiate his claim that he was subjected to harsh conditions on account of his religion and nationality, and that Ashcroft and Mueller were the “principle architects” of this plan.
Four Justices dissented, and in an opinion written by Justice Souter agreed with the lower courts' findings that Ashcroft and Mueller did violate his civil rights and could therefore be held responsible.
Top Court: Ashcroft, Mueller Not Liable For Muslim Civil Rights Violations
Shortly after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the U.S. government allowed law enforcement officials to arrest people of “high interest” according to race, religion, or national origin, according to Javaid Iqbal, a Pakistani citizen who was placed in a maximum-security prison in early 2002.
Iqbal claimed that the government’s decision violated his civil rights and he sued former U.S. Attorney General John Aschcroft and Robert Mueller, then-Director of the FBI.
Today, the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Justice Kennedy, ruled against Iqbal.
Kennedy wrote that Iqbal’s initial filings did not provide enough information to automatically find Ashcroft and Mueller responsible for the abuses he suffered while being held.
The case will now return to the lower courts, where Iqbal may have a chance to substantiate his claim that he was subjected to harsh conditions on account of his religion and nationality, and that Ashcroft and Mueller were the “principle architects” of this plan.
Four Justices dissented, and in an opinion written by Justice Souter agreed with the lower courts' findings that Ashcroft and Mueller did violate his civil rights and could therefore be held responsible.