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
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...
Access to Justice
January 14, 2026

CAC Release: Supreme Court Justices Pose Difficult Questions to State-Affiliated Corporation that Claims Immunity from Suit

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Galette v....
By: Brian R. Frazelle, Harith Khawaja
Access to Justice
U.S. Supreme Court

Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corp. and New Jersey Transit Corp. v. Colt

In Galette v. New Jersey Transit Corporation and New Jersey Transit Corporation v. Colt, the Supreme Court is considering whether state-affiliated corporations have sovereign immunity.
Access to Justice
October 6, 2025

RELEASE: Supreme Court Considers the Scope of a Defendant’s Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel

WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Villarreal v....
Access to Justice
June 12, 2025

CAC Release: In a Narrow, Unanimous Decision, Supreme Court Gives Victims of Wrong-House Raid Another Chance to Hold the Government Accountable

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Martin v. United States,...