by Brandon Tensley, CNN
(ACTION NEWS NOW) He did nothing wrong, the man. He hadn’t engaged in illegal activity. But his innocence didn’t matter, he said, because he was Muslim.
Muhammad Tanvir, who was living lawfully in the US, said that, in 2007, FBI agents approached him and asked him to consider working as an informant against Muslims. Tanvir refused, but the FBI continued to pressure him over the next several years, eventually placing his name on the no-fly list, he said. Being on the list limited his ability to travel domestically, and made it impossible to travel abroad. He quit his job as a long-haul trucker because he couldn’t fly, and alleged that after he bought a ticket to visit his ailing mother in Pakistan, he wasn’t allowed to board.
Tanvir’s experience wasn’t unique. In 2013, he and two other men — Jameel Algibhah and Naveed Shinwari — filed suit, saying that the FBI had placed them on the no-fly list to coerce them into acting as informants.
In December 2020, in a unanimous decision, the US Supreme Court held that, under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, federal officials may be liable in their individual capacities if they violate a person’s religious rights. The high court also said that the three men were entitled to seek damages.
Very definitely, the outcome was a victory for the plaintiffs. Yet the decision had a dark undertow. It served as a reminder that, in crucial ways, the social and political fallout from September 11, 2001, can still inflict great harm, even 20 years on.
