A Somali woman who was handcuffed for nearly five hours during a 2006 raid at her apartment while wearing only a nightdress received $40,000 to settle a lawsuit against federal agents she says ignored pleas to allow her to cover herself in front of strangers in keeping with her Muslim faith.

The settlement was the final federal claim remaining in a civil-rights lawsuit filed last year by Habibo Jama, 32, against the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Seattle and Tukwila police departments in connection with the controversial 2006 DEA investigation known as “Operation Somali Express.”

The national raids — including 17 searches and 19 arrests in the Seattle area — targeted a national distribution network of a leafy herb known as “Khat,” which is illegal in the U.S. but commonplace in the Horn of Africa where it has been chewed for centuries as a mildly euphoric stimulant.

In hindsight, federal law-enforcement officials have acknowledged that the raids were ill-conceived and alienated the U.S. Somali community, which has been targeted for recruiting by Islamic militants.

Jama’s claims that the agents who raided her Seattle apartment entered illegally and used excessive force were dismissed by U.S. District Judge John Coughenour last month. The judge also dismissed Jama’s claim that police detectives from Tukwila, who were part of the DEA-run task force, took gold jewelry from the apartment and never returned it.

Coughenour said those claims are now better addressed in state court.

It took Tukwila police nearly 10 months to return to Jama $5,700 in cash found in a suitcase in the apartment, and then only after a federal judge questioned why the city was trying to forfeit it without evidence it was linked to any drugs. No drugs were found in the apartment, and Jama, a Somali refugee and a U.S. citizen, said she had scrimped to save the money as a hotel maid, according to court documents.

In dismissing the unlawful-search allegation, Coughenour said the agents acted reasonably when they opted to break down the apartment door after seeing first Jama, and then another person, peer from the apartment’s windows as the search team assembled downstairs. The lead agent said he knocked, announced himself, and waited eight- to 10 seconds before ordering the door breached.

The armed agents rounded up several people in the apartment, including Jama, and handcuffed them in the living room. Jama was clad in a nightgown without any underclothes and said she was humiliated by officers, who would not allow her to cover her head in accordance with Islamic tenets that require women to wear a scarf or “hijab” and modest clothing in the presence of men they do not know.

Later, she was led outside and left sitting handcuffed on a curb, still in the nightdress and in full view of neighbors and passers-by, for several hours, according to court documents.

Jama alleged violations of the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act, however Coughenour ruled that the agents were entitled to immunity because whatever right Jama enjoyed to modest clothing wasn’t clearly established.

However, the judge said Jama could take a claim of “outrage” over those allegations to trial, which prompted the government to settle for cash.

“A rational jury … could find that federal agents knew full well that Plaintiff’s Muslim faith made her particularly susceptible to emotional distress under these circumstances,” the judge wrote.

Modest clothing was available in the apartment the officers were searching, and Coughenour found that the circumstances could support a conclusion that the officers “unnecessarily degraded” Jama and that their behavior could be seen as “atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized society.”

Jama’s attorney, David Whedbee, said he was glad that Jama was able to recover something from the raids. He said she intends to appeal the judge’s decision to throw out the illegal-search claim.

Emily Langlie, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, confirmed the settlement.

“We are making no admission of liability,” she said. “Given the expense of continuing to defend this case, this seemed like a reasonable solution.”

___

Source: Seattle Times  Mike Carter: 206-464-3706 or

Comments

comments