Associate
Imagine This: The FBI at Your Door—By Mistake
It’s early morning. You’re at home with your family, having dinner, maybe still in bed, when suddenly your front door is blown open. Flash-bang grenades go off. Boom! Agents in tactical gear rush in, shouting. “Get down! get down!” You’re pulled from your closet, terrified and confused. They scream “Show me your hands or I will shoot!” Only after the chaos do you realize: the FBI raided the wrong house.
This isn’t a cop movie. It’s what happened to a family: dad; mom; and 7-year-old boy in suburban Atlanta. On October 18, 2017, the FBI was supposed to raid a suspected gang house at 3741 Landau Lane. But they, relying on his own GPS and missing obvious clues—a different car, the wrong house number—led the team to 3756 Denville Trace. An innocent family’s home. The result? Trauma, injuries, and a family left to pick up the pieces while the agents realized their mistake too late. Guess what? They lost the GPS to prove that they made a mistake. Spoiled evidence anyone?
Can You Sue the Government? Sure but you must Meet the FTCA and it is complicated
Most people think you can’t sue the government. That’s because of something called “sovereign immunity”—a legal shield that usually protects the government from lawsuits. But Congress created the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) to basically say, “If our employees mess up while doing their jobs, sometimes you can hold us accountable.” People think they can sue the FBI under the Fourth Amendment for what happened here, but they are wrong.
The FTCA lets people sue the United States for certain wrongs (called “torts”) committed by federal employees. But there are some big exceptions:
- Intentional-Tort Exception: Normally, you can’t sue for intentional acts like assault or battery.
- Discretionary-Function Exception: If a government employee was making a judgment call or policy decision, you can’t sue for harm caused by that.
There’s also a special rule called the “law enforcement proviso.” If a federal law enforcement officer (like an FBI agent) commits certain intentional torts—think assault or false arrest—you can sue the government, but only for those specific wrongs.
What Did the Supreme Court Say in Martin v. United States?
The family sued under the FTCA, arguing the FBI’s actions were both negligent and intentional torts. Lower courts sided with the FBI.
Almost 8 years later, the Supreme Court stepped in and clarified two big points:
- The Law Enforcement Proviso Is Narrow: The special rule for suing over intentional torts by law enforcement officers only applies to the intentional-tort exception. It doesn’t override other exceptions, like the discretionary-function exception. So, even if you’re suing for assault by an FBI agent, your case can still be blocked if it falls under the discretionary-function exception.
- No Special “Supremacy Clause” Defense: The government tried to argue it couldn’t be held liable if its officers were following federal law or policy. The Supreme Court said no—the FTCA sets the rules. The government is liable under state law just like a private person, unless a specific federal law says otherwise.
The case was sent back to the lower court to decide if the discretionary-function exception blocks the family’s claims. If not, the court must decide if the government would be liable under Georgia law, just like any private person who raided the wrong house.
What Does This Mean for You?
If federal agents raid the wrong house, victims can sometimes sue the government under the FTCA—but only if their claims fit within the law’s narrow exceptions. The Supreme Court made it clear: the special rule for law enforcement officers doesn’t open the door as wide as some thought, and the government can’t invent new constitutional defenses to dodge responsibility.
Bottom line: Martin v. United States is an example of how the law works when the government makes mistakes (and mysteriously loses evidence like GPS 😊). It shows how courts interpret complicated rules to decide who can—and cannot—be held accountable.
If you want to know your rights when the government gets it wrong, understanding cases like Martin v. United States is a great place to start. Stay informed, know your rights, and don’t be afraid to ask questions when it comes to government accountability.