WASHINGTON IN BRIEF

Appeals Court Rejects Suit of Ex-Detainees Against Officials

A federal appeals court ruled yesterday that four British men have no right to sue top Pentagon officials and military officers over torture, abuse and violations of their religious rights that they allege to have sustained while detained for two years at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled unanimously that simply alleging criminal conduct by then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and individual U.S. military officials does not give the four men a claim under the Alien Tort Statute.

The four men do not allege that the defendants "acted as rogue officials or employees who implemented a policy of torture for reasons unrelated to the gathering of intelligence," the court said in an opinion written by Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson.

"Therefore, the alleged tortious conduct was incidental to the defendants' legitimate employment duties," the ruling said.

The appeals court also rejected claims under the Constitution, the Geneva Conventions and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

The latter provides that the "government shall not substantially burden a person's exercise of religion."

"Because the plaintiffs are aliens and were located outside sovereign United States territory at the time their alleged RFRA claim arose, they do not fall with the definition of 'person,' " the court ruled.

Joining LeCraft Henderson, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush, in the opinion were Judges Janice Rogers Brown, appointed by President Bush, and A. Raymond Randolph, appointed by George H.W. Bush.

Lower Court Ordered to Block NASA's Background Checks

NASA should be blocked from conducting background checks on low-risk employees at its Jet Propulsion Laboratory because the practice threatens workers' constitutional rights, an appeals court ruled.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit said that the 28 scientists and engineers who refused to submit to the background checks "face a stark choice -- either violation of their constitutional rights or loss of their jobs."

The decision written by Judge Kim Wardlaw reversed a ruling by U.S. District Judge Otis Wright and sent the case back to him with orders to issue an injunction on the workers' behalf.

The workers sued the federal government, contending that NASA was invading their privacy by requiring the investigations, which included probes into medical records and the questioning of friends about such things as their finances and their sex lives. If they did not agree to the checks, they could be fired.

NASA argued that the investigations were not intrusive and followed a Bush administration policy applying to millions of civil servants and contractors.

-- From News Services