Federal Bureau of Investigation, et al. v. Fikre
Issues
Does the voluntary cessation exception to mootness apply when the government removes an individual from the No Fly List and asserts it will not put them back on it given the available information without also repudiating past inclusion on that list or acknowledging a discrete policy change which informed the removal?
This case asks the Supreme Court to decide whether Yonas Fikre’s (“Fikre”) removal from the No Fly List in 2016, alongside a sworn declaration indicating he would not be placed back on it “based on the currently available information,” makes moot his case against the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”) regarding his placement on the No Fly List. Fikre argues that although the FBI removed him from its No Fly List in 2016, the government’s guarantees are insufficient to show that he will not be put back on the list for the original reasons, and as such his claim is still valid until the government voluntarily acquiesces to his requests or repudiates its inclusion of him on the list. The FBI counters by indicating that its sworn declaration would necessarily include all information which resulted in Fikre’s inclusion on the No Fly List in 2010 and his removal from it in 2016. Therefore, the FBI argues it is sufficient to prove Fikre would not be relisted for the same reasons as before, and to demand any more would require a showing of bad faith on the part of the government and unnecessarily endanger national security. The outcome of this case has serious implications for national security and the transparency of classified government programs like the No Fly List.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
Whether respondent’s claims challenging his placement on the No Fly List are moot given that he was removed from the No Fly List in 2016 and the government provided a sworn declaration stating that he “will not be placed on the No Fly List in the future based on the currently available information.”
In 2003, President George W. Bush executed Homeland Security Presidential Directive 6, instructing the attorney general to create the Terrorist Screening Center, an interdepartmental entity which consolidates every government terrorist watchlist into the Terrorist Screening Database (“Screening Database”) and organizes them into respective lists. Fikre v. Fed.
Additional Resources
- Joseph Davis, Nicholas Reave, The Point Isn’t Moot, Yale Law Review (November 26, 2019).
- Lydia Wheeler, Supreme Court Takes FBI’s Fight Against No Fly List Lawsuit, Bloomberg (September 29, 2023)