The Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Tuesday in favor of a Muslim man who said he had been put on the no-fly list in retaliation for refusing to become a government informant. The court rejected the government’s contention that removing the man from the list had rendered his case moot.
The no-fly list, which rapidly expanded after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, appears to include tens of thousands of people. The criteria for inclusion on the list are opaque, making it subject to errors and abuse.
Yonas Fikre, an American citizen, challenged his placement on the list, saying it had violated due process and amounted to discrimination based on race, national origin and religion.
The legal proceedings are at an early stage, and Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, writing for the court, said it was required to assume that the following version of events, set out in the lawsuit, was true.
@ISIDEWITH4mos4MO
Should personal privacy or national security be prioritized when they come into conflict?
@9KZWXBW4mos4MO
national secruity should be prioitised because its more valuble than one person
@9KZJZ54Bloc Québécois4mos4MO
a little as it puts up the value of safety over your privacy
@9KZD7694mos4MO
personal privacy should be prioritized because of our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
@ISIDEWITH4mos4MO
@ISIDEWITH4mos4MO
How does the idea of a 'no-fly list' affect your perception of individual freedoms versus collective safety?
@9KZM97SConservative4mos4MO
A no fly list is important as it highlights potential threats entering the air and it keeps the others safe.
@ISIDEWITH4mos4MO
