Does the 'appropriate relief' of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act allow for damages liability or nominal damages against the United States for breaching official duties that infringe on religious and travel rights?

Does the “appropriate relief ’ of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act allow for damages liability, or nominal damages where other damages cannot be quantified, against the United States where, by a breach of duty in their official capacity, a government officer or employee injures the Petitioners ’ in their natural and fundamental rights of the free exercise of religion and right to travel beyond the borders? Should the Petitioner ’s case have been mooted for want of standing regarding that question? Does “appropriate relief ’ of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act provide for damages relief in this case against the unnamable parties in their individual capacity whose identities can only be found by discovery? Should the case have been dismissed with prejudice against the Petitioners without discovery where they alleged that they were injured in their religious, travel and due process rights by tortfeasors whose breach of duty was the cause or proximate cause of the Petitioners ’ injuries? i