No. 19-546

Douglas Brownback, et al. v. James King

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-10-28
Status: Judgment Issued
Type: Paid
Amici (6)Relisted (2) Experienced Counsel
Tags: bivens-claim bivens-claims civil-procedure civil-rights due-process federal-jurisdiction federal-tort-claims-act government-liability judgment-bar sovereign-immunity state-tort-law
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity FourthAmendment CriminalProcedure
Latest Conference: 2020-03-27 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a final judgment in favor of the United States in an action brought under Section 1346(b)(1) bars a claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971)

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), 28 U.S.C. 1346(b), 2671 et seg., waives the sovereign immunity of the United States and creates a cause of action for damages for certain torts committed by federal employees “ander 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 also imposes a judgment bar, which provides that “[t]he judgment in an action under section 1346(b) of this title 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.” 28 U.S.C. 2676. The question presented is whether a final judgment in favor of the United States in an action brought under Section 1346(b)(1), on the ground that a private person would not be liable to the claimant under state tort law for the injuries alleged, bars a claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), that is brought by the same claimant, based on the same injuries, and against the same governmental employees whose acts gave rise to the claimant’s FTCA claim. (I)

Docket Entries

2021-03-29
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
2021-02-25
Judgment REVERSED. Thomas, J., delivered the <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-546_7mip.pdf'>opinion</a> for a unanimous Court. Sotomayor, J., filed a concurring opinion.
2020-11-09
Argued. For petitioners: Michael R. Huston, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Patrick M. Jaicomo, Arlington, Va.
2020-09-23
Reply of petitioners Douglas Brownback, et al. filed. (Distributed)
2020-09-02
CIRCULATED
2020-09-01
The record received from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit is electronically filed.
2020-08-31
Record requested from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit.
2020-08-31
Brief amici curiae of The American Civil Liberties Union et al filed.
2020-08-31
Brief amici curiae of Members of Congress filed.
2020-08-31
Brief amici curiae of Cato Institute and National Police Accountability Project filed.
2020-08-31
Brief amicus curiae of Law Enforcement Action Partnership filed.
2020-08-31
Brief amici curiae of Professors James Pfander, Gregory Sisk & Zachary Clopton filed. (9/11/2020) (Distributed)
2020-08-28
Brief amicus curiae of Public Citizen filed.
2020-08-24
Brief of respondent James King filed.
2020-08-19
SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, November 9, 2020.
2020-06-19
Brief of petitioners Douglas Brownback, et al. filed.
2020-06-19
Joint appendix filed.
2020-04-21
Motion to extend the time to file the briefs on the merits granted. The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' brief on the merits is extended to and including June 19, 2020. The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 24, 2020.
2020-04-09
Motion for an extension of time to file the briefs on the merits filed.
2020-03-30
Petition GRANTED.
2020-03-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/27/2020.
2020-02-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/20/2020.
2020-02-05
Reply of petitioners Douglas Brownback, et al. filed.
2020-01-21
Brief of respondent James King in opposition filed.
2019-11-08
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including January 22, 2020.
2019-11-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 27, 2019 to January 22, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-10-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 27, 2019)
2019-09-16
Application (19A184) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until October 25, 2019.
2019-09-13
Application (19A184) to extend further the time from September 25, 2019 to October 25, 2019, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.
2019-08-18
Application (19A184) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until September 25, 2019.
2019-08-16
Application (19A184) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from August 26, 2019 to September 25, 2019, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.

Attorneys

Cato Institute and National Police Accountability Project
Thomas Mark BondyOrrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Amicus
Thomas Mark BondyOrrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Amicus
Douglas Brownback, et al.
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Petitioner
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Petitioner
James King
Patrick Michael JaicomoInstitute for Justice, Respondent
Patrick Michael JaicomoInstitute for Justice, Respondent
Law Enforcement Action Partnership
Robert Allen Long Jr.Covington & Burling, LLP, Amicus
Robert Allen Long Jr.Covington & Burling, LLP, Amicus
Members of Congress
Angela C. VigilBaker and McKenzie LLP, Amicus
Angela C. VigilBaker and McKenzie LLP, Amicus
Professors James Pfander, Gregory Sisk & Zachary Clopton
Carter G. Phillips — Amicus
Carter G. Phillips — Amicus
Public Citizen
Allison M. ZievePublic citizen Litigation Group, Amicus
Allison M. ZievePublic citizen Litigation Group, Amicus
The American Civil Liberties Union et al
David D. ColeAmerican Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Amicus
David D. ColeAmerican Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Amicus