Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Curtrina Martin, Individually and as Parent and Next Friend of G. W., a Minor, et al. v. United States, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 23-10062 · judgment April 22, 2024
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Questions presented
Petitioners are the innocent victims of a wrong-house raid conducted by an FBI SWAT team in Atlanta, Georgia. Seeking a remedy for torts committed against them, Petitioners brought a cause of action against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act. In its opinion below, the Eleventh Circuit held that all of Petitioners' FTCA claims are barred by sovereign immunity supplied either through the Constitution's Supremacy Clause or the FTCA's discretionary-function exception. In one or more ways, the opinion below conflicts with decisions from every other circuit. The questions presented are:
-
Whether the Constitution's Supremacy Clause bars claims under the FTCA-a federal statute enacted by Congress-when the negligent or wrongful acts of federal employees "have some nexus with furthering federal policy and can reasonably be characterized as complying with the full range of federal law." Pet. App. 17a (quotation omitted).
-
Whether the FTCA's discretionary-function exception bars claims for torts arising from wrong-house raids and similar negligent or wrongful acts by federal employees GRANTED LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: 1) WHETHER THE CONSTITUTION’S SUPREMACY CLAUSE BARS CLAIMS UNDER THE FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT WHEN THE NEGLIGENT OR WRONGFUL ACTS OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES HAVE SOME NEXUS WITH FURTHERING FEDERAL POLICY AND CAN REASONABLY BE CHARACTERIZED AS COMPLYING WITH THE FULL RANGE OF FEDERAL LAW. 2) WHETHER THE DISCRETIONARY-FUNCTION EXCEPTION IS CATEGORICALLY INAPPLICABLE TO CLAIMS ARISING UNDER THE LAW ENFORCEMENT PROVISO TO THE INTENTIONAL TORTS EXCEPTION. EXPEDITED BRIEFING. CHRISTOPHER MILLS, ESQUIRE, OF CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA, IS INVITED TO BRIEF AND ARGUE THIS CASE, AS AMICUS CURIAE, IN SUPPORT OF THE JUDGMENT BELOW AS TO THE FIRST QUESTION IDENTIFIED IN THE ORDER GRANTING THE PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Patrick Michael Jaicomo
Institute for Justice
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 3 conferences
Amicus briefs
2 cert-stage · 9 merits
(9 supporting pet./neither)
Argument & decision
Argued April 29, 2025 — Patrick M. Jaicomo · Frederick Liu · Christopher E. Mills. Audio and transcript
Decided June 12, 2025. Opinion by Gorsuch.
Proceedings
- Aug 05 2025Record returned to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
- Jul 14 2025Judgment Issued.
- Jun 12 2025Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Gorsuch, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Sotomayor, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Jackson, J., joined.
- Apr 29 2025Argued. For petitioners: Patrick M. Jaicomo, Arlington, Va. For respondents: Frederick Liu, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For Court-appointed amicus curiae in support of judgment below on Question 1: Christopher E. Mills, Charleston, S. C.
- Apr 22 2025Reply of petitioners Curtrina Martin, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Apr 17 2025Motion for divided argument filed by the Solicitor General GRANTED.
- Apr 08 2025Motion for divided argument filed the Solicitor General.
- Apr 01 2025Brief of respondents United States, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 31 2025Brief of Court-appointed amicus curiae in support of the judgment below filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 19 2025CIRCULATED
- Mar 14 2025Brief amicus curiae of Public Citizen filed.
- Mar 14 2025Brief amicus curiae of North Central Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Association filed.
- Mar 14 2025Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center filed.
- Mar 14 2025Brief amicus curiae of Professor Gregory C. Sisk filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 14 2025Brief amici curiae of Public Accountability, et al. filed.
- Mar 14 2025Amicus brief of New Civil Liberties Alliance not accepted for filing. (March 18, 2025)
- Mar 14 2025Brief amicus curiae of New Civil Liberties Alliance filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 14 2025Brief amici curiae of America's Future, et al. filed.
- Mar 14 2025Brief amici curiae of National Police Accountability Project, et al. filed.
- Mar 14 2025Brief amici curiae of Members of Congress filed.
- Mar 13 2025Sealed material received from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia and available with the Clerk (one envelope). The remainder of the record is electronic and is available on PACER.
- Mar 07 2025Record received from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The record is electronic and is available on PACER.
- Mar 07 2025Brief of petitioners Curtrina Martin, et al. filed.
- Mar 07 2025Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)
- Feb 28 2025Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
- Feb 24 2025SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, April 29, 2025.
- Jan 28 2025Christopher Mills, Esquire, of Charleston, South Carolina, is invited to brief and argue this case, as amicus curiae, in support of the judgment below as to the first question identified in the order granting the petition for a writ of certiorari.
- Jan 27 2025Petition GRANTED limited to the following questions: 1) Whether the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause bars claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act when the negligent or wrongful acts of federal employees have some nexus with furthering federal policy and can reasonably be characterized as complying with the full range of federal law. 2) Whether the discretionary-function exception is categorically inapplicable to claims arising under the law enforcement proviso to the intentional torts exception. Petitioners’ brief on the merits is to be filed on or before Friday, March 7, 2025. Respondents' brief on the merits is to be filed on or before Tuesday, April 1, 2025. The reply brief is to be received by the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Tuesday, April 22, 2025.
- Jan 21 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/24/2025.
- Jan 13 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/17/2025.
- Dec 24 2024DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2025.
- Dec 20 2024Reply of petitioners Curtrina Martin, et al. filed. (Distributed)
- Dec 06 2024Brief of respondents United States, et al. in opposition filed.
- Nov 26 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 6, 2024.
- Nov 25 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 2, 2024 to December 6, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
- Oct 31 2024Brief amici curiae of Members of Congress filed.
- Oct 31 2024Brief amicus curiae of Professor Gregory C. Sisk filed.
- Oct 11 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 2, 2024.
- Oct 09 2024Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 31, 2024 to December 2, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
- Sep 27 2024Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 31, 2024)
- Jul 22 2024Application (24A74) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until September 27, 2024.
- Jul 18 2024Application (24A74) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 28, 2024 to October 27, 2024, submitted to Justice Thomas.