THE SUPREME COURT’S DECISION IN ASHCROFT V. IQBAL: NEW BARRIERS FOR CIVIL RIGHTS PLAINTIFFS
By Melanie Hirsch, Brayton-Baron Fellow at Public Justice
On May 18, 2009, the Supreme Court issued its 5-4 decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, No. 07-1015, --- S.Ct. ----, 2009 WL 1361536 (May 18, 2009), a case that will have enormous implications for civil rights plaintiffs seeking to hold high-level government officials accountable for violating the Constitution.
Javaid Iqbal, a Pakistani Muslim living in New York, was among a large number of Arab-Americans and Muslims rounded up and detained in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. He was held for more than 150 days in a maximum security unit at Brooklyn’s Metropolitan Detention Center, where he alleged that he was subjected to solitary confinement, unnecessary and abusive strip searches, beatings, and other abusive treatment. After his release, Iqbal brought suit against the individual officers who had mistreated him, as well as former Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller. Iqbal alleged that Ashcroft was the architect of the policy of rounding up men of Muslim or Arab descent and that Mueller was charged with implementing that policy. He sued both officials under Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), for detaining him because of his race, religion, or national origin, in violation of the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. READ MORE.
READ OUR PREVIOUS ACCESS TO JUSTICE UPDATES
Coneff v. AT&T: Corporation based in Washington that has allegedly cheated customers nationwide can't use choice-of-law clause and class action ban to avoid Washington law and ban nationwide class action by Leslie A. Bailey, Public Justice Staff Attorney.
Wyeth v. Levine: U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Swallow Big Pharma's Federal Preemption Pill by Leslie A. Brueckner, Public Justice Staff Attorney.