WASHINGTON, D.C. - On Tuesday, April 29th, Supreme Court justices heard arguments related to a case from Atlanta, Georgia, involving a 2017 pre-dawn FBI raid of the wrong house that left a family traumatized and thousands of dollars in damages.
ABC News, along with other media outlets reported that the justices appear poised to rule narrowly over when federal law enforcement can be held liable for mistakes that harm innocent victims. Since the incident happened, lower courts tossed out the victims' case for compensation because of sweeping legal immunity for government officials.
Much of the debate focused on an exception to the immunity clause that Congress added to the Federal Tort Claims Act of 1974. Patrick Jaicomo, an attorney representing the family, said, "If you really, really meant to drop the pizza off at the right address, it doesn't matter. You still need to give a refund if you drop it off at the wrong address."
Frederick Liu, an assistant solicitor general argued that officers exercising discretion in performance of their duties should not be subject to lawsuits and second-guessed by courts. He said, "The officers here made a reasonable mistake." Some of the justices, however, did not appear to be buying the argument.
Justice Sonia Sotomayer said, "That is so ridiculous. Congress is ... providing a remedy to people who have been wrongfully raided, and you're now saying, 'No, they really didn't want to protect them fully.'"
Legal experts said that a majority of law enforcement agencies across the country do not keep track of wrong-house raids nor do they publicly report that data. Civil rights activists claim that there are hundreds of cases of wrong-house raids nationwide every year and that most victims are not compensated for the physical or emotional harm that often results from them.
When Liu argued that the FBI agents in the case did not violate any government policy despite the mistake, Justice Neil Gorsuch shot back saying, "No policy says, 'Don't break down the wrong door? Don't traumatize the occupants'? Really?" Liu responded, "It's the United States' policy to execute the warrants at the right house." Gorsuch said, "I should hope so."
NBC News reported that although all three individuals inside the house complied with the agents' demands, the experience was traumatizing. Trina Martin said, "I was robbed of the feeling that your home is a safe place." Toi Cliatt, the owner of the home, was handcuffed and thrown on the floor with guns pointed at his head.
Martin wanted to rush to her son, but wasn't allowed to move. Gabe, who was seven-years-old at the time, woke up abruptly to see agents with guns in his bedroom. Gabe, who is now 14-years-old said, "It still sticks with me to this day." From the perspective of the FBI, it was a fleeting moment of error.
Once the agents realized they had gone to the wrong location, they quickly left. Later on, a supervisor returned, apologized and gave Cliatt his card. Despite having sympathy for the victims, many of the justices appeared wary of a broad ruling that might open the floodgates to litigation against the federal government.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who is the justice most often in the majority, suggested that the Supreme Court is likely to provide a limited decision and return the case to the lower courts for further consideration. Gorsuch said such an outcome would be a "perfectly sensible approach."
ABC News, along with other media outlets reported that the justices appear poised to rule narrowly over when federal law enforcement can be held liable for mistakes that harm innocent victims. Since the incident happened, lower courts tossed out the victims' case for compensation because of sweeping legal immunity for government officials.
Much of the debate focused on an exception to the immunity clause that Congress added to the Federal Tort Claims Act of 1974. Patrick Jaicomo, an attorney representing the family, said, "If you really, really meant to drop the pizza off at the right address, it doesn't matter. You still need to give a refund if you drop it off at the wrong address."
Frederick Liu, an assistant solicitor general argued that officers exercising discretion in performance of their duties should not be subject to lawsuits and second-guessed by courts. He said, "The officers here made a reasonable mistake." Some of the justices, however, did not appear to be buying the argument.
Justice Sonia Sotomayer said, "That is so ridiculous. Congress is ... providing a remedy to people who have been wrongfully raided, and you're now saying, 'No, they really didn't want to protect them fully.'"
Legal experts said that a majority of law enforcement agencies across the country do not keep track of wrong-house raids nor do they publicly report that data. Civil rights activists claim that there are hundreds of cases of wrong-house raids nationwide every year and that most victims are not compensated for the physical or emotional harm that often results from them.
When Liu argued that the FBI agents in the case did not violate any government policy despite the mistake, Justice Neil Gorsuch shot back saying, "No policy says, 'Don't break down the wrong door? Don't traumatize the occupants'? Really?" Liu responded, "It's the United States' policy to execute the warrants at the right house." Gorsuch said, "I should hope so."
NBC News reported that although all three individuals inside the house complied with the agents' demands, the experience was traumatizing. Trina Martin said, "I was robbed of the feeling that your home is a safe place." Toi Cliatt, the owner of the home, was handcuffed and thrown on the floor with guns pointed at his head.
Martin wanted to rush to her son, but wasn't allowed to move. Gabe, who was seven-years-old at the time, woke up abruptly to see agents with guns in his bedroom. Gabe, who is now 14-years-old said, "It still sticks with me to this day." From the perspective of the FBI, it was a fleeting moment of error.
Once the agents realized they had gone to the wrong location, they quickly left. Later on, a supervisor returned, apologized and gave Cliatt his card. Despite having sympathy for the victims, many of the justices appeared wary of a broad ruling that might open the floodgates to litigation against the federal government.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who is the justice most often in the majority, suggested that the Supreme Court is likely to provide a limited decision and return the case to the lower courts for further consideration. Gorsuch said such an outcome would be a "perfectly sensible approach."
For corrections or revisions, click here.
The opinions reflected in this article are not necessarily the opinions of LET
Comments
2025-05-04T18:18-0400 | Comment by: Raconteur
"Legal experts said that a majority of law enforcement agencies across the country do not keep track of wrong-house raids nor do they publicly report that data. " Wow, if I were them, I wouldn't want that data let out to those who might want to be made whole, after a jacked-up raid on the wrong house. Yeah, just hide it and deny its existence. Never happened!
2025-05-05T10:51-0400 | Comment by: Michael
Clearly, the officers should not be opened to "a flood of lawsuits", especially to them personally. They were following orders and who knows who provided the incorrect address. However, it seems common sense that there should be a fund to provide relief for victims of such. It's only reasonable to do so.