In Khan v. City of Richardson, (ND TX, March 4, 2026), a Muslim woman sued after she was required to remove her hijab during the intake, photo and fingerprinting process at the Richardson police department and the Dallas County Jail. The court allowed Plaintiff to proceed on her claims under RLUIPA, and under the Texas Constitution, saying in part:
While “appropriate relief “does not include monetary damages against states, “municipalities and counties may be held liable for money damages under RLUIPA....
Richardson and Dallas assert that Plaintiff’s claims arising under Article I, § 6 of the Texas Constitution should be dismissed to the extent that they seek money damages. Plaintiff does not dispute that the Texas Constitution does not provide a private cause of action to recover monetary damages for a violation of rights under the Texas Constitution. Instead, Plaintiff avers that she is only seeking equitable relief, which is permitted.
The court dismissed without prejudice plaintiff's claim under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act because she did satisfy TRFRA’s pre-suit notice requirements.
The court dismissed with prejudice plaintiff's Section 1983 claim because Plaintiff did not sufficiently plead a policy or custom that was promulgated or ratified by a policymaker and did not adequately plead a failure to train.
The court also dismissed plaintiff's claim under the Texas Tort Claims Act because Plaintiff has alleged an intentional tort which is barred by sovereign immunity.
