It was therefore not “silent” on the issue of damages, and the Franklin presumption is consequently inapplicable. For the foregoing reasons, the court holds that Plaintiffs’ individual capacity RFRA claim against the Esmor Guards for money damages may stand. Neither the text nor the legislative history of RFRA indicates that Congress intended in that statute to abrogate the qualified immunity to which executive officials were entitled under common law. The court thus finds that the defense would have been available to the INS officials under RFRA had they remained parties to this action. However, the defense of qualified immunity is not available to the Esmor guards, because they are not executive officials. Richardson v. McKnight, 521 U.S. 399, 117 S.Ct. 2100, 138 L.Ed.2d 540 (1997) (<HOLDING>). For reasons similar to those discussed above,
holding that defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity holding that employees of a private prison management firm are not entitled to qualified immunity from suit by prisoners charging a violation of 42 usc  1983 holding that prison disciplinary hearing committee members are entitled to qualified immunity holding that prison guards who are employees of a private prison management firm are not entitled to a qualified immunity from suit brought by prisoners under  1983 holding that prison conditions are those aspects of prison life affecting the entire prison population