Here is the article from USA Today:
The article itself is on top of the page.
Here is the U.S. District Judge Ann D. Montgomery’s Memorandum Opinion and Order on the Multiple Motions for Summary Judgement:
http://www.cair.com/Portals/0/pdf/7-24-09-Judge-Montgomery-Court.pdf
Initially, I was pretty pissed off after reading the article. There were reasons that these individuals should be detained that seemed legitimate at the time and these people were able to turn it into a lawsuit. It also greatly worries me that individuals will now be afraid of acting in their official capacities because while doing so in this case (with one exception) apparently they can be sued as individuals and in their official capacities.
As I read through Judge Montgomery’s Memorandum, I did take note of the fact that Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment Rights were violated in this case. These are of course, the Rights to practice Religion and the Right to not be unfairly imprisoned or detained. I actually found myself taking the side of those who were detained as I read through this thing and thought that I concluded that their Constitutional Rights were violated.
My point of view flip-flopped again when I re-considered the fact that these individuals who were detained originally wanted to go after everyone even remotely involved, including the people that reported the suspicious activity, whether private and random individuals or airline crew. The article mentions that Congress passed a bill shortly thereafter granting immunity to individuals that report suspicious behaviour while doing so in good faith, but the thought that these guys wanted to go after people who had the best interests of others at heart is appalling. Equally appalling is the fact that they would want to sue people acting in their official capacity individually, of course when this happens very rarely does the court levy astronomical rulings in terms of money they have to pay out. It is really more of an intimidation tactic to draw a settlement.
Ultimately, I’m not sure if the, “Evidence,” was sufficient at all to detain these guys, but it may have been. One thing I am interested in when it comes to suing the people individually is whether or not they are even aware (or can reasonably be expected to be aware) of exactly what the Fourteenth Amendment entails. The Fourth Amendment, sure, after all they are in the business of law enforcement, so they must know that. As far as the Fourth Amendment goes, though, it has never been proven or will it ever be proven that the individuals were improperly detained/arrested. I understand that all of the evidence involved here is circumstancial, but when it comes to a spur-of-the-moment decision, what else do you have?
As far as the Fourteenth Amendment argument is concerned, the Judge makes the assumption that had the same situation occurred with Caucasians, the result would not have been the same. I think that it very well could have, I just don’t think that the initial reports of suspicious people (made by people who are not capable of being sued, per the Judge’s findings) may not have taken place. Of course, that is not the fault of any parties who got sued who are merely responding to the reports of suspicious people, you know, their job. Although, part of me wonders if you had six white guys all praying to Allah in the airport that all board the same plane and appear, to the untrained observer to be sitting in a certain way as to cover the plane, would that really go completely unnoticed?
They also want to argue that their Fourteenth Amendment Rights as it concerns Religious protection were violated. That’s bullshit, nobody stopped them from praying while they were doing it, therefore, that particular clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was not violated. As far as Religious discrimination goes, maybe, but Wiccans (Just for example) didn’t make a national exhibit and name for themselves by blowing up planes, either.
After all of that, the one thing I take away from this that saddens me most is the fact that these particular and specific imams are doubtlessly pieces of shit, in my opinion. First of all, they wanted to sue individuals who were reporting this suspicious activity because they didn’t want anybody to fucking die. Can an error not be forgiven if good intentions are what caused the error? Secondly, they wanted to sue all of the detaining parties as individuals and not just in their official capacity. Once again, intimidation tactic, but still unjustifiable in my opinion.
More than all of that, though, these so-called, “Religious Leaders,” could have used this very public event as an example to people that Islamic people are often treated unfairly and viewed harshly in the U.S.A… This would have been an excellent way to illustrate the point that when we are detaining Religious leaders where no crime has actually been committed, nor is there an intent to commit a crime that this country has gone to far with relation to acting with prejudice to a defined group of people. They could even have used this to spread understanding and empathy to the Islamic culture (They were praying in the airport because they had to, per their Religious beliefs.)
Instead, these particular and specific individuals decided to prove themselves to be pieces of shit by wanting to sue everyone in sight just to make examples out of people, but probably mostly just to make money. These are the Islamic Religious leaders? These are the people that those of the faith look up to? Damn, and I thought the Catholics were fucked.