Tanzin v. Tanvir | |
---|---|
Argued October 6, 2020 Decided December 10, 2020 | |
Full case name | FNU Tanzin, et al. v. Muhammad Tanvir, et al. |
Docket no. | 19-71 |
Citations | 592 U.S. ___ (more) |
Argument | Oral argument |
Case history | |
Prior | Judgment against plaintiff sub nom Tanvir v. Lynch 128 F.Supp. 3d 756 (S.D.N.Y. 2015); reversed and remanded, 894 F.3d 449 (2d Cir. 2018); rehearing en banc denied, 915 F.3d 898 (2d Cir. 2019) |
Holding | |
The express remedies provision under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 permits litigants to obtain monetary damages against federal officials in their individual capacity whenever it is appropriate for such litigants to do so. United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Majority | Thomas, joined by Roberts, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh |
Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
Laws applied | |
Religious Freedom Restoration Act |
Tanzin v. Tanvir, 592 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case involving legal remedies that could be sought by litigants against federal officials for violations of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993. In a unanimous decision issued December 10, 2020, the court ruled that the Act allowed for litigants to seek not only injunctive relief but also monetary damages.
Notably, the Respondents in this case were Muslims who sued because federal agents put them on the No Fly List for refusing to be informants against their religious community.[1] Legal scholars praised this case for protecting religious liberty.[2]