U.S. Postal Service v. Konan

Questions presented

SCOTUS records, cert granted 21 Apr 2025

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), ch. 753, 60 Stat. 842 (28 U.S.C. 1346(b), 2671 et seq.), generally waives the United States' sovereign immunity for suits seeking damages "for injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission" of an employee of the federal government "under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred." 28 U.S.C. 1346(b)(1). The FTCA, however, excepts from that waiver of immunity "[a]ny claim arising out of the loss, miscarriage, or negligent transmission of letters or postal matter." 28 U.S.C. 2680(b). The question presented is as follows: Whether a plaintiff's claim that she and her tenants did not receive mail because Postal Service employees intentionally did not deliver it to a designated address arises out of "the loss" or "miscarriage" of letters or postal matter. 28 U.S.C. 2680(b).

Opinion summary

Etalia.ai summary of the majority opinion

The dispute was over whether the Federal Tort Claims Act’s postal exception bars suits against the United States when postal workers intentionally refuse to deliver mail. Lebene Konan claimed Postal Service employees withheld mail from her rental properties and caused financial and emotional harm, and she sued on state-law tort theories. The Court, in an opinion by Justice Thomas, held that sovereign immunity still applies. It reasoned that the statutory terms “miscarriage” and “loss” of mail, read in their ordinary 1946 meanings, cover mail that fails to reach its intended destination even when the failure is intentional. The Court also said the word “negligent” modifies only “transmission,” not the other terms, and rejected Konan’s surplusage argument because the statutory terms overlap in ordinary usage. The judgment of the Fifth Circuit was vacated and the case remanded.

Dissent summary

Etalia.ai summary of the dissenting opinions

Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan, Gorsuch, and Jackson, argued that the postal exception should not be read to immunize intentional misconduct. The dissent said the FTCA is a broad waiver of sovereign immunity and that exceptions should be read no more broadly than their words and purpose allow. It viewed the postal exception as narrower than the majority did and said Congress identified specific postal misconduct, not all claims arising from postal activity. The dissent would have affirmed the Fifth Circuit’s view that claims based on intentional withholding of mail, including for malicious reasons, fall outside the exception.