Supreme Court says family can sue over wrong-house raid by FBI
The Supreme Court on Thursday said innocent victims of wrong-house raids and other abuses by federal law enforcement can seek compensation for emotional and physical harms, upholding a key exception to sweeping legal immunity that has long protected the government from being sued.
The Court's decision resuscitates a lawsuit brought by Trina Martin and Toi Cliatt whose Atlanta home was mistakenly raided by the FBI in 2017, traumatizing Martin's then 7-year-old son and incurring $5000 of damage from burned carpet, broken doors, and fractured railings.
Agents quickly acknowledged they had stormed the wrong address due to a faulty GPS direction, but the FBI refused to provide any restitution. Lower courts later tossed out the family's liability claims, citing sweeping protections under federal law.
In a unanimous decision, the high court said the Martin case could move forward but stopped short of rendering judgment on whether the FBI could successfully invoke other legal defenses related to the discretionary nature of its job.
"If federal officers raid the wrong house, causing property damage and assaulting innocent occupants, may the homeowners sue the government for damages? The answer is not as obvious as it might be," wrote Justice Neil Gorsuch in the Court's opinion.
"All agree that the Federal Tort Claims Act permits some suits for wrong-house raids. But the scope of the Act's permission is much less clear," he said.
Gorsuch confirmed that Congress has unambiguously opened the door to potential liability when an officer commits an "assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, or abuse of process." He remanded the case to a lower court for further consideration as to whether the FBI could invoke other protections.
“This is a victory for us but also for everyone who is fighting for accountability and justice,” Trina Martin said in a statement. “This isn’t over, but we look forward to continuing the fight. What happened to us was wrong and should never happen to anyone. I’ve been praying constantly about our case, and it is amazing to have those prayers be heard.”
While there is no reliable nationwide data, civil rights advocates say there are likely hundreds of cases of wrong-house raids by U.S. law enforcement every year, sometimes resulting from faulty intelligence or inadvertent human or technological error.
Legal immunity for cops often means little restitution for victims.
The Trump administration had argued that the Martin case be tossed out because officers exercising discretion in the course of their duties should not face the threat of lawsuits and second-guessed by courts.
“Today the Supreme Court confirmed that victims of federal abuse have a powerful tool to seek accountability,” said Patrick Jaicomo, senior counsel with Institute for Justice, which represented the Atlanta family.
There was no immediate reaction to the decision from the Department of Justice.
The ruling comes as advocates for victims of police misconduct and mistakes say President Donald Trump is rolling back guardrails on law enforcement.
The Trump Justice Department has put a freeze on federal civil rights investigations into cops and cancelled conset degrees with police departments found to have engaged in a patter of misconduct.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, urged the lower court in the Martin case to be critical of the administration's assertions of immunity for officers' discretionary actions in the line of duty.
She said courts should not ignore lawmakers' intent in carving out an exception to blanket immunity under federal law. "Any interpretation should alow for liability in the very cases Congress amended the [Federal Tort Claims Act] to remedy," Sotomayor wrote.
