The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit on March 24, 2022, on behalf of three Muslim Americans who were subjected to unconstitutional questioning from border officials regarding their religion while traveling in the Los Angeles International Airport. The three Muslim Americans were asked multiple controversial and inappropriate religious questions. These included whether they were Muslim, attended a mosque, which mosque they attended if they did, the frequency of their prayer, and whether they were Sunni or Shi’a. The answers to these questions would be retained in a law enforcement database for up to 75 years. The suit was filed in Los Angeles.
Plaintiff Imam Abdirahman stated, “I am proud to be a Muslim. But now whenever I travel back home to the United States, I’m anxious. I’m constantly worried about how I will be perceived, so much that I try to avoid calling any attention to my faith. I normally wear a Muslim prayer cap, but I no longer wear it at the airport to avoid being questioned by border officials. It’s terrible to feel you must hide an essential part of who you are from your own government. I shouldn’t be questioned because of my religion.” The plaintiff was arguing that his free exercise of religion was being infringed upon and significantly disturbed, to the point where he felt like he even had to hide this part of himself. He argued that this was a clear act of discrimination and violated his rights as an American. However, this practice is not rare. Muslim American travelers have been targeted by border officials for 20 years because of their religion. This is an ongoing theme that continues to occur and has begun to place a substantial burden on the victims of this targeting.
This issue is very significant, because under the Constitution, everyone has the right to practice their religion freely. The fact that the border officials questioned these travelers just because of their appearance and religion is very discriminatory and not constitutional. As Abdirahman stated, he now feels worried and targeted. He fears wearing his Muslim prayer cap out in public, because of the sole purpose that he continues to be targeted. Because the Constitution allows the free exercise of religion, I agree that the rights of the three Muslim Americans were being infringed upon. The questioning by the officials also violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, because of this unequal treatment based on religion.
I believe the questioning by the officials is not necessary or constitutional. It places a direct burden on the practice of religion for not only these three individuals, but other religions that have been discriminated against in the past just because of appearance and pre-conceived notions regarding the religion and its practices. This is an immense problem that needs to be addressed more frequently, to avoid situations like the one that Abdirahman unfortunately experienced. He has these rights under the Constitution, and there is no justification for the actions and questioning of the border officials.
These individuals were fearing their own government. There is a compelling interest present here in favor of the three Muslims, because they were obviously discriminated against. I cannot think of any argument that makes the questioning by the officials reasonable and not discriminatory. The Muslims had no criminal record; as a matter of fact, they were strangers to the officials. The fear of being able to practice their religion is an extremely valid and compelling argument in this case because it does affect these individuals daily. They should be able to go out in public and not have to worry about facing people who are going to question them just because they are Muslim. This could not be a clearer violation of the free exercise of religion. The Free Exercise Clause is in place to ensure that Americans can live their life freely based on religion, and the border officials violate that right significantly. There is a slippery slope present here as well, because if Muslims are questioned, then shouldn’t other religions be questioned as well (for example Jews)? I ultimately think there is no justification for the actions of the officials, and this discrimination is something that seriously needs to be altered for the betterment of society.
Sources:
Customs and Border Protection Infringed Upon
Muslim Americans Sue Over Border Officers' Invasive Questions
8 comments:
This is a very interesting case, and it is disheartening to hear about the ongoing persecution of Muslim Americans in the United States. I agree with your perspective that this is not constitutional and violates the plaintiff's First Amendment Rights under the constitution. The plaintiff's religion should not have anything to do with his ability to enter the country, especially as a citizen of the United States. Furthermore, the plaintiff mentioned that he no longer feels comfortable wearing his religious garments in airports. If the plaintiff feels he cannot follow his religious beliefs due to prosecution, this is a clear violation of his ability to freely practice his religion.
I completely agree with Sam here, this is very sad case that unfortunately is a very prevalent issue in our current times. The airport officials had no legitimate reason to question these Muslim American flyers, as they should not be treated any differently than any other passengers traveling into the country, who possess any other religion. This type of questioning is directly linked to discrimination bias. Under the First Amendment of the Constitution, the government can not infringe or restrict upon individuals right to religion and the expression of such. These individuals should not feel as though they must be secretive about their religious practice, out of fear they will be viewed as a threat to national security. After all, everyone is equal under the law and as citizens they have the same inalienable rights as anyone else. For this, discriminating against citizens out of religious biases and questioning is an infringement of the First Amendment rights.
While I agree that this is by definition unconstitutional, I want more information regarding the facts of this case. What questions were being asked? How were they feeling discriminated against directly? Did it take them longer to get on the plane? I just want to understand the extent of the burden being placed on the Muslim individuals. While I do not agree with this, the only argument that could be made in defense of the airport is a 'compelling state interest' because historically those extremist in the Muslim community have been involved in terrorism against the United States. 9/11 was a very serious and detrimental even that caused such strict airport security to be in place in the first place. This 'compelling state interest' is not a valid argument because 9/11 was so long ago and because there was nothing these people were doing that made them seem a threat other than practice their religion. I side with the questioned Muslims for this case.
I definitely agree in the fact that one should not be discriminated because of their religion. In my opinion, history of discriminatory means is not a rationale to continue this unjustness. With this being said, I understand the compelling state interest for one wanting to display their religion openly, but unfortunately, the United States also may hold some amount of a compelling state interest to question Muslims just due to the events of 9/11. As a whole, I understand both sides but based off of the First Amendment, it is not constitutional to question or discriminate one because of their religion or beliefs.
I do agree that targeting any religious group for questioning based entirely on their appearance is unconstitutional. However, I agree with Clara and would like to know more about the facts of the case. I know that the TSA has very strict guidelines on when someone can be searched, and that in many airports there is a random search policy, where people in line are selected at random for a more in depth search of themselves and their personal items. Could it be that these men happened to be randomly selected for a search, and they just happened to be Muslim? Were they behaving in a way that, under TSA guidelines, gave officers proper authority to stop and ask them questions? I would like to know more about TSA policy and hear what they have to say to defend their actions before making any serious decisions on the constitutionality of their actions.
I totally agree with your analysis Sam. This is a very sad case but it is the harsh reality. Discrimination should not be allowed or permitted in any form. This was somewhat shocking to me as I know there are many strict rules on security checks in airports. I am aware that they have a pattern or method for stopping people. I am wondering, like other commenters, if this was just a correlation and not discrimination. However, these actions should not be taken lightly as this is a serious offense. I would be interested to see what LAX is saying in response to this lawsuit and allegations. I would assume they would have a reasonable response, or at the very least would fire the workers that are committing these discriminatory acts.
I agree with Sam, I believe that these government officials questioning these people was discriminatory. I do believe that security should take proper precautions in asking questions or searching how they see fit only if there is probable cause and not based solely on how someone looks. In this scenario it seems as if there wasn't any other reason for these question other than the appearance based on the questions they were being asked and that isn't acceptable. I also wonder like Ryan what the TSA guidelines are to questioning and how they can be compared to the line of questioning that occurred.
I think that these officials were acting in a discriminatory manner as well. I am not extremely familiar with TSA guidelines, but some of the questions seem more religiously targeted than I would assume they should be. I do believe there is a compelling state interest and them being subject to a stop is not unconstitutional, but asking someone how often they pray and if they attend a mosque does not seem to be questions of national security that a government official should be asking in these scenarios. However, I think that in cases like these, we need more information as well as the opinion of experts in order to properly decide if these questions were necessary or targeting them for their religion.
Post a Comment