Document Type


Publication Date



This Article is concerned with shedding light on Iqbal. It will argue that this relatively obscure legal opinion may be one of the most infamous and harmful to American jurisprudence and individual rights of this generation. In particular, it will argue that (1) the Iqbal Court misapplied the traditional pleading standards that govern motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim in finding Iqbal’s particular complaint deficient and, in doing so, functionally and needlessly heightened those standards;19 and (2) the Court erred in finding unremarkable Iqbal’s allegations that the government engaged in blanket racial profiling of Muslims and Arabs because this evaluation of the merits of Iqbal’s allegations is improper at the motions to dismiss stage and the comment itself is substantively problematic, particularly in consideration of Korematsu v. United States,20 an infamous opinion from another wartime setting. As a result of these doctrinal missteps, the case, as a practical consequence, will provide the government with greater latitude to institute security programs and policies that are discriminatory, and conversely, will increase the burden on alleged victims of those programs and policies to seek redress for violations of their constitutional rights. In sum, it is the central contention of this Article that the Court in Iqbal, to put it simply, got it wrong.

Publication Title

Buffalo Law Review



First Page


Included in

Law and Race Commons



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.