Supreme Court Argument
Video
Photo Gallery
What happened to the Martins?
In 2017, Trina Martin and her son Gabe were living at the home of her then-boyfriend Toi Cliatt. Early in the morning, an FBI SWAT team battered down their door, detonated a flash-bang grenade, and swept through the home with assault rifles. Toi rushed Trina to a closet while Gabe was alone in his bedroom. When agents discovered Toi and Trina, they handcuffed Toi and started to interrogate him. It was only when Toi stated his address that the agents realized they were in the wrong place.
The SWAT team left the home and went to the address of the house they had a warrant for. The lead agent later returned and left a card for Toi to reach out to about compensation. But the federal government refused to compensate them for anything, even though the raid led to lost wages and therapy bills.
The three sued the FBI but their case was dismissed first by a federal district court and then the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.
What is at stake in Martin v. U.S.?
Federal law enforcement officers mess up: they raid the wrong home, they arrest the wrong person, they assault a suspect that isn’t resisting. Innocent people should not be left to pick up the pieces of their life when government agents harm them. That’s why Congress added a section to the Federal Tort Claims Act to provide a remedy for victims of police mistake. Congress passed that law to make sure people like the Martins can sue for compensation, but courts have created loopholes so big that even the exact lawsuits Congress meant to address get kicked out of court. If the Martins can’t get justice, can anyone?
What are the “questions presented”?
The Supreme Court doesn’t consider cases in their totality, instead it considers specific legal questions. In Martin v. U.S., the Court is considering two questions: 1) whether the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution bars the Martin’s lawsuit, and 2) whether an exemption in the Federal Tort Claims Act bars the lawsuit.
Who will be arguing?
IJ Senior Attorney Patrick Jaicomo will be arguing for the Martins. An attorney with the United State Solicitor General’s office will argue for the government. Since the government did not defend the decision in regard to the Supremacy Clause barring the suit, the Supreme Court appointed attorney Christopher Mills, a former clerk of Justice Clarence Thomas, to argue opposite IJ on that question.
What is the Federal Tort Claims Act?
First, for non-lawyers, a tort is a wrongful act that can allow someone to file a lawsuit. The Federal Tort Claims Act is a 1946 law that Congress passed in order to let people sue the federal government. Absent the law, the federal government enjoys “absolute immunity” from suit. Before 1946, if someone was harmed by a federal government action, their recourse was to ask Congress to pass a “private bill” specifically to provide them relief.
Predictably, asking Congress to individually right the wrongs committed by the federal government was slow and led to unfair outcomes. Also, as the federal government grew rapidly during the Great Depression and World War II, Congress couldn’t keep up with all the worthy requests for compensation. The FTCA now allows people to sue in a federal court for things that were considered torts under state laws.
Are there exceptions to the FTCA?
Congress passed into law certain exceptions barring some types of lawsuits under the FTCA. One of these exceptions is the “discretionary function” exception. The general intent behind the exception is to prevent lawsuits against the federal government that second-guess laws or regulations that are otherwise constitutional but cause some harm. Congress didn’t want the federal courts to become a place where policy decisions were re-hashed or have federal employees face suit when they were doing their job as directed by Congress.
What is the “law enforcement proviso”?
In the original FTCA, Congress included an exception for “intentional torts.” While the thought was to keep the federal government from being subject to lawsuit when any federal employee got into a fight or hurt someone intentionally, it became apparent that the exception allowed federal agents to get away with horrible abuses.
In the early days of the Nixon administration’s War on Drugs, federal agents without uniforms and without warrants invaded the homes of several innocent Illinois families. The wrong-house raids made national news. In 1974, Congress added an exception to the FTCA’s exceptions to allow for claims when law enforcement commits “assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution.”
What is the Supremacy Clause?
The U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause states that Constitution and federal laws are the “supreme Law of the Land.” This means that states cannot create laws that supersede laws created by Congress. It does not limit the federal government’s power to enact federal laws.
What are “Canons of Construction”?
Canons of construction are tools that courts use to interpret legal text. They’re guidelines to help figure out the meaning of words and ensure that laws are interpreted consistently. For instance, words should be interpreted within the context of the statute they appear. And if it seems like two provisions conflict with each other, the court will give precedence to the one that is more recent or more specific.
What was the 11th Circuit’s position?
The appeals court affirmed the dismissal of the Martins’ lawsuit on two separate grounds. The court held that the Martins’ non-intentional tort claims fell under the discretionary function exception because no FBI policy established what “preparatory steps” Agent Guerra had to take when he was trying to find the house described in the warrant. As for the Martins’ intentional-torts claims, which fit squarely within the law enforcement proviso, the Eleventh Circuit ruled that the Supremacy Clause barred those claims. Although the FTCA is a federal statute, it incorporates the elements of state tort law in the jurisdiction where the harm occurred. According to the Eleventh Circuit, Congress’s choice to incorporate state tort law into a federal statute violates the supremacy of federal law.
The Martin’s case would have come out different in many other places in the country. The Eleventh Circuit, for instance, is the only court with a Supremacy Clause bar for FTCA claims. And other circuits apply the discretionary function exception to claims allowed by the law enforcement proviso, while the Eleventh Circuit does not. Such “circuit splits” are a strong argument for the Supreme Court to take up a case.
Why is there a different attorney arguing the Supremacy Clause question?
The government did not defend the position taken by the 11th Circuit panel on the Supremacy Clause. In situations like this, the Supreme Court appoints an experienced attorney (typically one of the justices’ former clerks) to argue the other side of the question presented.
How does oral argument work?
Since the Martins are in the position of appealing their case, IJ will argue first, the Solicitor General will argue second, and the appointed attorney will argue third. IJ will then have a short time for rebuttal.
Each side has 30 minutes to argue, with the government’s side divided between the SG and the appointed attorney. The attorneys have two minutes to open before justices begin to ask questions. After an open time of questions, the Chief Justice will give the associate justices, in order of seniority, individual time to ask questions.
When will the Supreme Court issue a decision?
The Court issues all of its decision for a term before it breaks for Fourth of July. The Court announces what days it will issue decisions in advance, but not which decisions will be issued. It will likely be late May or June before a decision in Martin v. United States is delivered.