FBI v. Fikre

Yonas Fikre, a U.S. citizen and Eritrean native, alleged that the FBI placed him on the No Fly List after he refused to become an informant, leaving him stranded in Sudan and preventing his return to the United States. He filed suit challenging the placement. The government later removed him from the list and argued the case was moot. The district court and the Ninth Circuit rejected that argument, holding the government had not met its burden under the voluntary cessation exception. The Supreme Court affirmed unanimously on March 19, 2024, ruling that the government failed to show the challenged conduct could not reasonably be expected to recur.

The Supreme Court unanimously held that the case was not moot, affirming the Ninth Circuit and remanding for further proceedings because the government failed to demonstrate that the alleged No Fly List placement could not reasonably be expected to recur.

Whether Fikre's removal from the No Fly List mooted his constitutional challenge, and whether the government met its heavy burden of proving that the challenged placement could not reasonably be expected to recur.

The ruling strengthens judicial review of secret watchlists, prevents the government from evading constitutional scrutiny by unilaterally changing an individual's status, and clarifies the voluntary cessation doctrine by placing a demanding burden on government defendants.