Martin v. United States
| Martin v. United States | |
|---|---|
| Argued April 29, 2025 Decided June 12, 2025 | |
| Full case name | Curtrina Martin, et al., v. United States of America, et al. |
| Docket no. | 24-362 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Holding | |
| (1) The law enforcement proviso overrides only the intentional-tort exception of the Federal Tort Claims Act, not the discretionary-function exception or other exceptions. (2) The Supremacy Clause does not afford the United States a defense in FTCA suits. (3) On remand, the Eleventh Circuit should consider whether the discretionary function exception bars either the plaintiffs' negligent- or intentional-tort claims. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Gorsuch, joined by unanimous |
| Concurrence | Sotomayor, joined by Jackson |
| Laws applied | |
| Federal Torts Claims Act | |
Martin v. United States, 605 U.S. ___ (2025), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision regarding the limitations of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), a federal law which allows private parties to sue the federal government for torts committed by people acting on behalf of the federal government.
On October 18, 2017, a team of SWAT agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation raided the home of Trina Martin, her partner at the time Toi Cliatt, and Martin's 7-year-old son. The agents forcefully entered the house with guns drawn using a battering ram and flash grenades. After handcuffing Cliatt and questioning him, the agents realized they had entered the wrong house by mistake. They had intended to arrest a suspected gang member who lived nearby.
In 2019, Martin and Cliatt sued the federal government under the FTCA for the wrong-house raid. A federal judge initially dismissed the case, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld that dismissal, holding that the FTCA's "discretionary-function exception", as well as the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, prevents Martin and Cliatt from bringing their claims under the FTCA. The Supreme Court granted certiorari on January 27, 2025. The court heard oral arguments on April 29, 2025. The Supreme Court ruled unanimously for the petitioner, and the decision was remanded and vacated.