WASHINGTON, March 4 – The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday ruled in favor of the FBI in a case involving discrimination against three California Muslim men who accused the organization of illegally monitoring them on September 11, 2001. attacks on the United States.
The court unanimously ruled in favor of a 2019 lower court ruling that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) violated the right to state confidentiality – a legal protection based on national security interests – that was enforced by the state.
The ruling means that the case will return to the lower courts for further proceedings, the claims filed by the plaintiffs have not yet been dismissed.
The Supreme Court erred in the analysis of the 9th U.S. District Court. of San Francisco, where Justice Samuel Alito wrote that the FISA provision in question “does not deprive the state of the right to privacy.”
The case has accused the FBI of infiltrating mainstream churches in Southern California and has targeted Muslim Americans for being detained for their religious beliefs. He accused the FBI of engaging in religious discrimination in violation of the U.S. First Constitution. The First Amendment by directing Muslims, as well as violating the prohibition of the Fourth Amendment in a senseless search and seizure.
The plaintiffs are: Eritrean-born American citizen Yassir Fazaga, imam at the Orange County Islamic Foundation in Mission Viejo; a U.S. citizen native Ali Uddin Malik, who visited the Irvine Islamic Center; and Yasser Abdel Rahim, a U.S. citizen permanently from Egypt who also visited the Irvine Islamic Center. They are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union and others.
The case focused on a 14-month period in 2006 and 2007 when the FBI paid whistleblower Craig Monteilh to collect information about Muslims as part of the post-September period. 11 counter-terrorism investigation. Montilh met Muslims in southern California, took the Muslim name and said he wanted to convert to Islam, according to court documents. Montilh also recorded the interviews and supervised them, according to court documents.
The plan came to fruition when Monteilh began making statements about wanting to take violent action. Members of the public reported the matter to the local police, who also obtained a restraining order, according to court documents.
A federal judge in 2012 dismissed the allegations against the FBI, ruling that they were banned under state confidentiality. The judge has accepted the allegations accusing certain FBI agents of violating the security law.
Section 9 ruled that religious claims should be reviewed under a section of the FISA law that allows judges to review the legitimacy of surveillance. Circuit 9 also allowed illegal search claims, not a case before the Supreme Court, to proceed.