In the so-called "flying imams" case (see prior posting), a Minnesota federal district judge on Tuesday permitted plaintiffs-- who claim that religious and racial discrimination was involved in their removal from a flight out of Minneapolis last year-- to move ahead with most of their numerous federal and state claims against US Airways and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). In Ibrahim v. U.S. Airways Group, Inc., (D MN, Nov. 20, 2007), the court among other things held that plaintiffs sufficiently alleged that U.S. Airways acted under color of law through joint conduct with MAC. The court also held that while the Federal Aviation Act shields airlines' decisions to exclude passengers for security reasons, that shield does not extend to plaintiffs' claims arising out of their arrest and detention after they were taken off the plane.
Yesterday's Minneapolis Star Tribune reporting on the decision, quoted Frederick Goetz, one of plaintiff's lawyers, who praised the decision: "This has always been a straightforward civil rights case. You had six individuals ... doing absolutely nothing wrong. They prayed in the airport and got arrested. That's unconstitutional, and they deserve redress."
