Washington, Dec 26 (NationPress) A US federal court has paved the way for a lawsuit initiated by parents from New York who claim negligence and emotional distress after their underage daughter was taken from Pakistan and brought to the United States without their consent. The court dismissed the government's attempts to have the case thrown out.

In an order dated December 11, Senior US District Judge Frederic Block rejected the motion submitted by the United States for a reconsideration of a previous ruling that permitted the parents' claims to continue.

“The United States’s motion is DENIED,” Judge Block stated in his memorandum and order released by the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

The lawsuit was filed by Mussarat Bano and Bashir Rahee against the United States, the City of New York, high-ranking officials from the New York City Administration for Children’s Services (ACS), and a private child welfare organization. The parents argue that officials mishandled their daughter's situation and kept them uninformed for several weeks after she arrived in the United States.

The court records show that the girl, referred to as FB, was a minor and a US citizen who was with her parents in Pakistan in June 2020. While in Pakistan, she reached out to US consular officials, claiming that her family was abusing her and preventing her from returning to the United States.

With help from US officials, FB escaped from her family on June 23, 2020, while still in Pakistan. She took a flight and landed in the United States on June 26.

For several days, the parents stated they had no updates regarding their daughter’s situation. On June 29, the government informed them that FB had departed Pakistan and was safe. However, they allege they were not provided any details about her whereabouts. It was not until July 20, 2020, that they discovered from New York State police that their daughter had returned to New York.

After her return, child welfare agencies in New York became involved. The case also included ACS and Little Flower Children and Family Services, a private foster care agency, indicating that FB’s care was managed through New York's child protection system rather than by her parents.

The Justice Department sought the court to re-evaluate its prior decision that denied a motion to dismiss, contending that the parents’ claims were barred under exceptions to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and that the complaint did not state valid claims for negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Judge Block dismissed all three of these claims.

The court noted that reconsideration is an “extraordinary remedy” that cannot be invoked simply because a party disagrees with an earlier ruling. For success, the government needed to demonstrate a change in controlling law, new evidence, or a clear error that would lead to manifest injustice. It failed to achieve this, as the judge detailed.

The government contended that the FTCA’s foreign country exception applied because the relevant actions occurred in Pakistan. The court disagreed, reiterating its previous finding that the parents had plausibly asserted tortious acts that occurred in the United States.

“The government may disagree with this conclusion,” Judge Block stated, “but it fails to identify any legal grounds for reconsideration.”

The court also rejected the government’s assertion that federal officials were protected by the FTCA’s due care exception. The government argued that officials were obliged by the Privacy Act to withhold information regarding the child's whereabouts after she returned to the United States because she did not consent to disclosure.

Judge Block determined that the Privacy Act did not require this course of action. Although the law generally restricts the disclosure of personal records, it also permits a parent to act on behalf of a minor. Thus, the statute allowed — but did not mandate — officials to withhold information.

“The government had discretion to share information with the Plaintiffs,” the court concluded, asserting that the due care exception did not hold. The judge also dismissed the government’s argument that the parents failed to establish valid legal claims.

“The government fails to establish any legal grounds for reconsideration and instead merely seeks to relitigate the merits,” the judge wrote in the order that enabled the lawsuit to continue against the federal government and other defendants.