Supreme Court Revives Lawsuit Over FBI SWAT Raid on Innocent Family

In a rare unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has revived a lawsuit filed by Atlanta residents Curtrina Martin and Hilliard Cliatt, whose home was mistakenly raided by FBI SWAT agents in 2017. The family had their lawsuit dismissed by lower courts, but now the justices have sent the case back to the 11th Circuit to reconsider key legal questions under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).

The Traumatic Raid

In the early hours of October 18, 2017, FBI agents—busting what they thought was a suspect’s home—broke down the door, tossed a flashbang grenade, and held guns on Martin, Cliatt, and their then-seven-year-old son. In just minutes, the agents realized it was the wrong address—just feet away from their actual target—apologized, and left. The child, Gabe, has since struggled with anxiety and trauma.

Legal Turning Point

Martin and Cliatt sued under the FTCA, asserting claims like assault, false imprisonment, and negligence. But lower courts dismissed the case—citing two legal shields: the “discretionary function exception” and the Supremacy Clause.

Today’s ruling questioned those defenses:

• Supremacy Clause: Justice Gorsuch noted that federal law—the FTCA itself—permits these kinds of state-law claims. He emphasized that lower courts wrongly barred suit without proper legal justification.

• Discretionary-function Exception: The justices flagged uncertainty over whether FBI agents’ actions fell into this exception, heartily rejecting a blanket immunity for wrongful raids.

Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justice Jackson, suggested that raiding the wrong home isn’t the type of discretionary decision meant to be shielded—Congress intended victims to have legal recourse.

Why It Matters

• Victims can hold agents accountable: This ruling reaffirms that federal officials aren’t automatically immune from civil suits when innocent citizens are harmed.

• Childhood trauma in focus: Gabe’s mother says the raid derailed his childhood—now the court acknowledges that such harm might deserve legal remedy apnews.com+15fox19.com+15ij.org+15.

• Checks on law enforcement: By reviving the case, the Court signaled that mistakes by federal officers may carry consequences, especially when they terrorize families in their homes.

What Comes Next

The case returns to the 11th Circuit, which must reconsider whether the FTCA’s exceptions still apply. If the appeals court rules in favor of Martin and Cliatt, the family could proceed to tri