SCOTUSblog by Daniel Harawa on Feb 25, 2021
A unanimous Supreme Court on Thursday issued a limited ruling on the Federal Tort Claims Act’s judgment bar.
The case, Brownback v. King, began in 2014, when officers working with an FBI task force in Grand Rapids, Michigan, tackled, choked and punched college student James King in the head after mistaking him for a fugitive. King sued the United States under the FTCA, which allows individuals to bring state law tort claims against the federal government. King also brought claims against the officers under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which allows individuals to sue federal officials for violating their constitutional rights.
The district court dismissed King’s FTCA claims. The court held that because Michigan law provides immunity for officials who do not act with malice, a state tort claim was not viable. (In a footnote, the Supreme Court noticeably did not express a view on whether state immunities would apply in this context). The district court therefore concluded that it lacked jurisdiction over the FTCA claims. It dismissed the Bivens claims on qualified-immunity grounds.
On appeal, King wanted to pursue only the Bivens claims. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit had to decide whether the appeal could go forward in light of the FTCA judgment bar. The judgment bar statute provides that a “judgment†in an FTCA action “shall constitute a complete bar to any action by the claimant, by reason of the same subject matter, against the employee of the government whose act or omission gave rise to the claim.†The 6th Circuit held that the district court’s dismissal in this case did not trigger the judgment bar, reasoning that a dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction is not a ruling on the merits, and therefore not a final judgment.
More:
https://www.scotusblog.com/2021/02/unanimous-court-issues-limited-ruling-on-judgment-bar-in-federal-tort-claims-act/
