Home  |  About Us  |  Contact Us  |  Donate  |  Email Alerts  |  Accomplishments

Obama appointed District Court Judge Paula Xinis denies motion to dismiss CAIR law suit against No Fly list which allows a jury to determine national policy regarding terror prevention.

At this point in the litigation perhaps a jury of lay people even with no national security or law enforcement experience offers more hope than this judge that national security will be given more of a priority.

District Court Judge Paula Xinis, District of Maryland, has denied the United States Attorney General and 25 other federal officials’ motion to dismiss the Council On American Islamic Relations (CAIR) legal challenge to the No Fly list.  The No Fly list is intended to prevent known or suspected terrorists from access to air travel.   You can read Judge Xinis’ full Order and Memorandum Opinion.  

Judge Paula Xinis has a heavy background in representing criminal defendants.  Judge Xinis worked at the Office of the Federal Public Defender for the District of Maryland as an Assistant Federal Public Defender from 1998 to 2011.  Judge Xinis also worked as faculty for national and regional training programs sponsored by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, Defender Services Division Training Branch.  Clearly, Judge Xinis’ legal experience is heavily weighted toward defendants.
On March 26, 2016, President Barack Obama nominated Judge Xinis to serve as a United States District Judge.   The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, a coalition of 200 national organizations, endorsed Paula Xinis. 

Therefore, it should come as no surprise that CAIR reports that Judge Xinis interprets that the No Fly list’s core principles are racist.  A CAIR press release states in part: Judge Xinis also explained that “[p]robing interrogations about travel to Muslim-majority countries, religious pilgrimages, learning Arabic, attending mosques, affiliations with Muslim organizations, religious donations, and associations with other Muslims” raise an inference that decisions to target Muslims are tied “directly, and perhaps solely, to Plaintiffs’ race, alienage, religious, and national origin.”  “Racist” as used by woke progressives is a word that indiscriminately labels any behavior according to leftist dictum, whether rationally or irrationally construed, as harmfully anti-social and deserving of severe punishment.

CAIR issued a news release on August 8, 2018  titled: CAIR Files Broad Challenge to Watchlisting System, Including TSA's Quiet Skies Program.  On April 29, 2019, federal agencies filed a Second MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.  These federal agencies filed a Notice of Supplemental Authority on November 20, 2019 in support of its motion to dismiss which states in part. On November 12, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in Abdi v. Wray, No. 18-4078, 2019 WL 5882375 (10th Cir. 2019), affirmed the dismissal of substantive and procedural due process and Administrative Procedure Act claims brought by a plaintiff alleging inclusion on the Selectee List subset of the Terrorist Screening Database (“TSDB”).  The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit’s affirmation of a lower court’s dismissal of a complaint similar to the one filed by Rami Khaled El Ali should have significantly strengthened the Defendant United States’ motion to dismiss the Rami Khaled El Ali complaint.  However, it did not influence Judge Xinis to dismiss the case.

Given Judge Xinis' affinity for some victims she would most likely not have dismissed this case under any circumstances.   However, Florida Family Association (FFA) tried to influence the judge anyway.  FFA launched an online campaign which asked people to send emails to encourage Judge Xinis to dismiss this case thereby preventing a jury from making national security policy decisions and terminating terror-linked CAIR’s legal challenge.   The judge received more than 10,000 emails.

Now that the judge has declined the motion to dismiss, the case will be heard by a jury if it is not settled before trial.   At this point in the litigation perhaps a jury of lay people even with no national security or law enforcement experience offers more hope than this judge that national security will be given more of a priority.

Florida Family Association will continue to monitor the court records for this case as it progresses. 

Florida Family Association has prepared an email for you to express disappointment to U.S. District Paula Xinis for not dismissing this case thereby allowing a jury to decide national security policy.

Click here to send your email to express concern to U.S. District Judge Paula XinisFor all email clients because there is only one email address.  YAHOO works best in Yahoo Mobile App, not so well with internet browser.

This email will open in your email browser because U.S. District Courts are blocking normal form emails sent through the Florida Family Association email server and emails with specific Subject Line wording.  If the above link does not open in your email browser or if the email is returned to you please prepare an email using the suggested subject line, content and email addresses provided below.  You may change any wording.

Suggested subject line:

Alarmed that a jury will decide this complex issue.

Suggested content:

Honorable Judge Paula Xinis,

I am very concerned that you denied the motion to dismiss Rami Khaled El Ali v. Barr.  It is very alarming to know that a jury of lay people with no national security or law enforcement experience will rule on complex policies regarding national security and terrorism.

Email Address


Contact information:

Paula Xinis, District Judge
District of Maryland
6500 Cherrywood Lane, Suite 400
Greenbelt, MD 20770
(301) 344-0653

Author: ffa   20200730   Category: CAIR, Courts  FFA: on

Copyright 2010-2023