Appeals Court Reinstates Muslim Americans’ Lawsuit Challenging Discriminatory Questioning by U.S. Border Officers

SAN FRANCISCO — In a major victory, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled today that three Muslim Americans plausibly established a pattern or practice of discriminatory religious questioning by U.S. border officers. This means that their lawsuit in the federal district court can proceed.

When the plaintiffs — an imam from Minnesota, a real estate professional from Arizona, and a finance professional from Texas — return home to the U.S. from international travel, border officers subject them to invasive and demeaning questioning about their religion. Officers ask questions such as whether they pray every day, whether they are Muslim, whether they attend a mosque, and whether they are Sunni or Shi’a. Officers then enter their answers into a law enforcement database, where they remain for up to 75 years. This questioning is part of a broader decades-long problem of border officers targeting Muslim American travelers because of their religion.

“Today’s decision is a victory for our clients and countless other Muslim Americans who are unfairly interrogated by border officers about their personal religious beliefs,” said Ashley Gorski, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s National Security Project. “Whether someone attends mosque or prays daily is entirely irrelevant to border security. We look forward to vindicating our clients’ rights to be treated equally and to practice their faith without undue government scrutiny.”

Last year, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted the government’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. Today’s decision from the Ninth Circuit reinstates the case, allowing the men to pursue their claims that border officers’ religious questioning violates their First Amendment rights, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the right to equal protection under the law. The plaintiffs are also asking the court to bar border officers from unlawfully questioning them about their faith at ports of entry, and to order expungement of all records reflecting their responses to previous religious questions.

“When I’m traveling back home to the U.S. from vacation, my biggest worry should be whether my flight is going to be delayed, not whether my government will pull me aside and interrogate me about my religion,” said plaintiff Imam Abdirahman Aden Kariye, a religious leader in Bloomington, Minn. “I am grateful that the Ninth Circuit is allowing our challenge to go forward, and I hope that it makes border officers think twice before unfairly targeting other Muslim Americans based on their religion.”

The ACLU, the ACLU of Minnesota, the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, and Cooley LLP represent the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The defendants are Alejandro Mayorkas, secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security; Troy Miller, acting commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection; Patrick J. Lechleitner, acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and Katrina W. Berger, executive associate director, Homeland Security Investigations.