TOPICS
TOPICS
Supreme Court upholds legal immunity for federal employees
The Supreme Court has rejected a challenge to federal employees' immunity from on-the-job lawsuits.
In a 7-2 decision last week, the high court ruled that the government can insert itself as the defendant in lawsuits against federal workers who claim innocence, even if the alleged act was not part of the accused employee's job description.
"It would make scant sense to read the [law] as leaving an employee charged with an intentional tort to fend for himself when he denies wrongdoing," Justice Ruth Ginsburg said in the majority opinion for Osborn v. Haley. Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas dissented.
In the case, government contractor Pat Osborn sued a Forest Service employee for allegedly convincing her employer, the Land Between the Lakes Association Inc., to fire her. Osborn claimed the employee, Barry Haley, did this after she confronted him for not hiring her for an open contracting officer position with the Forest Service.
A federal court in Kentucky, where the case originated, found that if Haley did get Osborn fired, that act was not in his job description, making him responsible for his own defense. The government appealed and won in the 6th District Court of Appeals, which covers Kentucky and several other states. The Supreme Court decision affirmed the appeals court's ruling.
Under the 1988 Westfall Act, federal employees are immune from lawsuits as long as the Attorney General certifies that they were doing their job when the incident in question occurred. The government can then substitute itself as the defendant.
Now the court has affirmed that the Attorney General can certify an act as job-related simply by denying that the incident ever occurred. The justices also affirmed that in such circumstances the cases should be heard in federal court, rather than at the state level. The government's involvement requires federal jurisdiction.
Justice Stephen Breyer sided with Ginsburg's opinion because of issues such as federal jurisdiction, but he disagreed that an innocence claim should be grounds for immunity.
"Consider, for example, an aggravated sexual assault...on Coney Island where the government employee, say a Yellowstone Park forest ranger, if present on Coney Island must have been there on a frolic of his own," Breyer said.
Scalia's dissenting opinion focused on the court's jurisdiction in this case, not on the ability of the government to step in on behalf of its employees.
COMMENTS
- I once worked at DoD. One time I was not happy about 3 of my coworkers being simultaneously promoted over me through secret accretion of duties of promotions. When it looked like I would either complain of discrimination or call a desk audit, I was told that "they would see to it that I would go down in grade if I called in a desk audit." I believed them, since the auditor worked at the agency personnel office and was in the "club." Yes, the management at that agency would put the mafia to shame. The only teamwork I observed there was how they all stuck together to keep down someone who happened to be a club member's enemy. Now, that is why management at DoD will never get any better. There's no accountability and they can therefore do anything they want. Robert M, you are onto something. GovExec.com reader Posted February 5, 2007 6:33 PM
- Robert M., Are you a federal employee? From our perspective, we don't feel that we will be supported by our managers if we do our jobs, much less the Justice Department, which decides whether or not to represent us depending on the merits of each case. In fact, in many cases, the Justice Department doesn't represent federal employees in matters resulting from what they did on the job, which is why many of us pay for professional liability insurance. Most federal employees do a great job, with no guarantee that the government will stand behind them. Of course, if any federal employee knowingly breaks the law, then all bets are off, and they should get what they deserve. GovExec.com reader Posted January 29, 2007 12:22 PM
- If it is to be left to the Attorney General's office to decide when a federal employee is personally liable for their actions, the Congress needs to make it unmistakably clear that this is not a responsibility to be taken lightly. History has proven beyond any doubt that some federal employees routinely violate the rights of innocent people under the guise of doing their jobs. Often, justice is never served. The Attorney General's office must stop looking the other way and act to make certain that federal workers aren't abusing their authority. Many people have been hurt because of perceived immunity from prosecution. Sometimes, the misdoings within the federal government resemble organized crime. The apathy must end. There must be accountability. Robert M. Posted January 29, 2007 8:21 AM
