Bloomberg Anywhere Login


Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world.


Financial Products

Enterprise Products


Customer Support

  • Americas

    +1 212 318 2000

  • Europe, Middle East, & Africa

    +44 20 7330 7500

  • Asia Pacific

    +65 6212 1000


Industry Products

Media Services

Follow Us

No-Fly List Found to Violate Constitutional Rights

June 24 (Bloomberg) -- A U.S. anti-terrorism “no-fly” program barring people from boarding planes without providing a reason or court hearing is unconstitutional, a federal judge in Oregon ruled.

U.S. District Judge Anna Brown in Portland ruled today in a lawsuit brought by 13 U.S. citizens and permanent residents that the government violated their right to due process by blocking them from flying since 2009. The plaintiffs, who say they pose no threat, included a U.S. Marine Corps veteran and an imam at a Portland mosque.

They filed complaints with the U.S. Homeland Security Department, which they said didn’t confirm or deny the existence of any terrorist watch-list records about them or explain why they are barred from flying.

“Notice of the reasons for inclusion on the no-fly list” and a chance to present evidence “would help ensure the accuracy and completeness of the record,” the judge wrote. She said travelers should have a chance to correct “simple factual errors” with “easy, ready and persuasive explanations.”

The U.S. no-fly list has been challenged in suits across the country by individuals and rights groups saying people are wrongly denied the right to remove their names.

The government says it provides a process by which travelers who believe they are improperly or unfairly barred from boarding planes can file a complaint. It defends its refusal to say whether anyone is on the list as necessary to protect national security.

Travelers can seek court review of their inclusion on the list, and the program is legal because those on the list can travel by other means, federal officials said in court filings.

Brown’s partial ruling left some claims unresolved.

A Justice Department spokeswoman, Dena Iverson, said the department was reviewing the decision and had no immediate comment.

The case is Latif v. U.S. Justice Department, 10-cv-00750, U.S. District Court, District of Oregon (Portland).

To contact the reporters on this story: Karen Gullo in federal court in San Francisco at; Edvard Pettersson in federal court in Los Angeles at

To contact the editors responsible for this story: Michael Hytha at Charles Carter

Please upgrade your Browser

Your browser is out-of-date. Please download one of these excellent browsers:

Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Opera or Internet Explorer.