DC Circuit Holds RFRA Inapplicable To Non-Resident Aliens In Gitmo Case

In Rasul v. Myers, (DC Cir., Jan. 11, 2008), two of the three judges ruling on a suit brought by a group of former Guantanamo detainees, held that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act does not protect the religious exercise rights of non-resident aliens. The majority held that non-resident aliens are not "persons" as that term is used in RFRA-- an interpretation which the majority says is consistent with the interpretation of "person" in the 4th and 5th Amendments. Judge Brown disagreed with the holding that non-resident aliens are not "persons", but she concurred in the dismissal of plaintiffs' religious abuse claims finding that Congress intended to provide a cause of action only for individuals whose religious exercise is protected by the First Amendment. The Baltimore Sun, the Miami Herald and the AP all reported on the case which had been brought by four released British prisoners who claim torture and religious abuse while they were held at Guantanamo. (See prior posting on district court's decision in the case.)