Access to Justice

Martin v. USA: A wrong-house raid ends up at the door of the Supreme Court

WASHINGTON (Gray DC) – It’s a classic David v. Goliath here at the Supreme Court.

Law enforcement raided the house of an innocent family, and they want the government to pay up.

The government says they shouldn’t have to.

“They busted down the front door. They detonated a flashbang grenade in the living room and they came in with guns drawn,” explains Dylan Moore, an attorney representing the victims from the Institute for Justice.

Moore says a law is already in place – called the Federal Claims Torts Act, or FTCA, to protect families like this one.

“Congress amended the FTCA to make sure that people who were subject to wrong house raids and other instances is of police misconduct would have a cause of action against the United States to recover for damages.”

But the lower courts ruled that in this case, there’s an exception.

“The 11th Circuit said the government doesn’t have to pay anything because they are protected by something called sovereign immunity,” explains Athul Acharya with the group Public Accountability.

The idea is that because the raid happened during normal law enforcement functions, the officers, and the government are shielded from accountability.

“The stakes are high in the sense that what the court did here was really an act of judicial policymaking.,” says Miriam Becker-Cohen with the Constitutional Accountability Center. “Courts are not supposed to be rewriting statutes and coming up with new exceptions to statutes that were specifically designed to create remedies”

Oral arguments are set for Tuesday, with a decision expected by June

More from Access to Justice

Access to Justice
March 4, 2026

CAC Release: Unanimous Supreme Court Rejects State-Affiliated Corporation’s Claim of Immunity from Suit

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Galette v. New Jersey...
By: Harith Khawaja
Access to Justice
February 25, 2026

CAC Release: In Disappointing Sixth Amendment Decision, the Supreme Court Made Clear the Limits of Its Decision

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Villarreal v. Texas, a...
By: Brianne J. Gorod
Access to Justice
February 12, 2026

February Newsletter: CAC Supports Everyday Americans Fighting for Their Day in Court

At every level of our judicial system, a complex set of doctrines determines what cases...
Access to Justice
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Taylor v. Healthcare Associates of Texas

In United States ex rel. Taylor v. Healthcare Associates of Texas, the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act violate Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

Flowers Foods v. Brock

In Flowers Foods v. Brock, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Federal Arbitration Act exempts from arbitration “last-mile” delivery drivers who transport goods between two points in the same state to their final destinations,...
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

T.M. v. University of Maryland Medical System

In T.M. v. University of Maryland Medical System, the Supreme Court is considering whether the Rooker-Feldman doctrine requires dismissal of a request for relief from a state-court decision that did not reach the state’s highest...