WASHINGTON (ABP) — The Supreme Court has instructed a lower court to review its decision that terrorism detainees lack religious rights under United States law.
The justices issued an order Dec. 15 reversing the January decision by the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals. The justices told the lower court to reconsider it in light of the high court's June ruling in Boumediene v. Bush, which found that detainees have some rights under the Constitution.
The ruling is a victory for supporters of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), one of the federal laws cited in the suit against U.S. officials filed by four former detainees held at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The decision also provides a vehicle for the incoming administration of President-elect Obama to weigh in on the legal status of detainees.
President Bush's administration has argued repeatedly that basic constitutional rights enjoyed by other civilians and prisoners of war do not apply to terrorism suspects. Obama has expressed a broader view of constitutional protections for so-called "enemy combatants" and other detainees in the U.S. struggle against terrorism.
The plaintiffs were British citizens detained by American forces in Afghanistan and then transported to the high-security U.S. prison for terrorism suspects. After two years, they were released from Guantanamo without being charged.
According to the men, U.S. officials repeatedly subjected them to religious harassment, including forcing them to shave their beards, interrupting their prayer services and desecrating the Quran, the Islamic holy book.
The Washington-based Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty — which filed a brief in favor of the prisoners' RFRA claims — welcomed the ruling.
"Individuals and faith communities from across the religious spectrum recognize that our country's commitment to religious freedom is one of its greatest attributes," BJC General Counsel Holly Hollman said, in a prepared statement. "RFRA is a limitation on governmental interference with religious practice. Its protections are intentionally broad and reflect the widely shared belief that religious freedom is paramount."
A broad group of religious organizations joined the BJC on the friend-of-the-court brief, including the National Association of Evangelicals, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the American Jewish Committee.
The case is Rasul et al. v. Myers et al, No. 08-235.
-30-
Robert Marus is acting managing editor and Washington bureau chief for Associated Baptist Press.