FBI v. Fikre

Yonas Fikre, a U.S. citizen, was placed on the No Fly List, severely restricting his travel. He sued the FBI alleging constitutional due process violations. During litigation, the government removed him from the list and stated it did not plan to relist him based on then-current information, then moved to dismiss the case as moot. The district court agreed, but the Ninth Circuit reversed. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. In a unanimous opinion by Justice Neil Gorsuch, the Court held that the government failed to meet the heavy burden of the voluntary cessation doctrine. The assurance was qualified and did not eliminate a reasonable possibility of relisting, thus the case remained live.

The Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the Ninth Circuit, holding that the case was not moot and could proceed. The government's conditional assurance was insufficient to satisfy the voluntary cessation standard.

Whether the government's removal of the plaintiff from the No Fly List, coupled with a statement that it did not plan to relist him under current policies, rendered the lawsuit moot under the voluntary cessation exception to the mootness doctrine.

The ruling reinforces the voluntary cessation doctrine, making it significantly harder for the government to unilaterally halt challenged conduct to evade judicial review. It carries broad implications for ongoing constitutional challenges to the No Fly List, terrorist watchlists, and other federal programs.