Al Janko v. Gates
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 147105
D.D.C.2011Background
- Syrian detainee Al Janko was held in Afghanistan and Guantanamo from 2002 to 2009.
- After habeas relief, he was released from Guantanamo on October 7, 2009.
- He filed a damages suit on October 5, 2010 against the United States, current and former officials, and many John/Jane Does.
- Amended in 2011 to add/strike defendants, counts, and claims including ATS, FTCA, and conspiracy theories.
- Court grants motions to dismiss Counts V–VII (ATS) and VIII–XVII/Count XVIII, and dismisses individual defendants under MCA § 7; later addresses jurisdictional issues tied to MCA and sovereign immunity.
- The case centers on whether the MCA § 7 jurisdictional bar and related sovereign-immunity principles deprive the court of jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s damages claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does MCA § 7 strip jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s damages claims? | AI Janko argues MCA § 7 does not apply to him. | Defendants contend § 2241(e)(2) bars all claims relating to detention and treatment. | Yes; court lacks jurisdiction; claims are barred. |
| Are ATS claims against the United States barred by lack of sovereign immunity waiver and FTCA foreign-country exception? | Plaintiff asserts ATS claims survive and FTCA provides waiver. | The United States has not waived immunity for ATS and FTCA claims arising in foreign countries. | Counts V–VII dismissed for lack of waiver; Counts VIII–XVII dismissed under foreign-country exception. |
| Do Westfall Act exceptions or qualified-immunity shield individual defendants if jurisdiction existed? | Plaintiff contends individual defendants are subject to ATS/FTCA claims. | Even if jurisdiction existed, qualified immunity would bar claims; Westfall Act does not apply to ATS. | moot due to jurisdictional dismissal; issue not reached. |
Key Cases Cited
- Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (U.S. 2008) (holding detainees have habeas rights, not addressing § 2241(e)(2) scope directly; MCA § 7 remains valid)
- Al-Zahrani v. Rumsfeld, 684 F. Supp. 2d 103 (D.D.C. 2010) (courts held MCA § 7 bars claims despite habeas relief; CSRT context)
- Al Ginco v. Obama, 626 F. Supp. 2d 123 (D.D.C. 2009) (granting habeas relief; subsequent damages suit context)
- In re Pet'rs Seeking Habeas Corpus Relief in Relation to Prior Detentions at Guantanamo Bay, 700 F. Supp. 2d 119 (D.D.C. 2010) (Hogan, J.; discusses jurisdiction and habeas relation to other actions)
- Rasul v. Myers, 512 F.3d 644 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (FTCA/RSAL; scope of detention-related actions)
- Rasul v. Rumsfeld, 563 F.3d 527 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (Rasul II; confirms scope of detention-related claims)
- Ali v. Rumsfeld, 649 F.3d 762 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (ATS claims and Westfall Act analysis; limits waiver)