--- title: Can You Sue A Federal Officer? SCOTUS May Soon Decide description: A broad ruling could shape whether and how federal border patrol agents—or federal officers generally—can be sued for alleged wrongdoing. canonical: https://time.com/6153164/supreme-court-sue-federal-officers/ author: Madeleine Carlisle article:opinion: false article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2022-03-01T22:24:00.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-05-11T04:54:28.195Z article:section: Politics og:title: The Justices Could Decide If You Can Sue a Federal Officer og:description: A broad SCOTUS ruling could shape whether and how federal officers can be sued for alleged wrongdoing og:url: https://time.com/6153164/supreme-court-sue-federal-officers/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltae6f64e3799c6ad2/698a231d656a3f3b31bdc43d/scotus-egbert-boule-court-case-sue-federal-agents-legislation.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 2400 og:image:height: 1350 og:image:alt: A scene of the U.S. Supreme Court building on January 26, 2022 in Washington, DC. og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: The Justices Could Decide If You Can Sue a Federal Officer twitter:description: A broad SCOTUS ruling could shape whether and how federal officers can be sued for alleged wrongdoing twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltae6f64e3799c6ad2/698a231d656a3f3b31bdc43d/scotus-egbert-boule-court-case-sue-federal-agents-legislation.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # The Supreme Court Could Soon Decide When a Federal Officer Can Be Sued > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: August 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=492ccef1-896c-4229-a17d-fbf06f77dcfb&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Daily | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Tuesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Monday to Saturday (3x per week) | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=492ccef1-896c-4229-a17d-fbf06f77dcfb&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=492ccef1-896c-4229-a17d-fbf06f77dcfb&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (daily health), Worth Your Time (culture, twice weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, three times a week), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement.  by [Madeleine Carlisle](https://time.com/author/madeleine-carlisle/)  ## Madeleine Carlisle Mar 1, 2022 10:24 PM UTC  A scene of the U.S. Supreme Court building on January 26, 2022 in Washington, DC. A scene of the U.S. Supreme Court building on January 26, 2022 in Washington, DC. Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images  by [Madeleine Carlisle](https://time.com/author/madeleine-carlisle/)  ## Madeleine Carlisle Mar 1, 2022 10:24 PM UTC Eight years ago, a U.S. Border Patrol agent got into a fight with a bed-and-breakfast owner in Blaine, Wash. Now, the facts of that fracas, as presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, may shape whether federal law enforcement officers can be sued generally for actions taken while performing their jobs. In March 2014, bed-and-breakfast owner Robert Boule says Border Patrol Agent Erik Egbert was interested in a guest, who was due to arrive from Turkey via New York. Boule alleges that Egbert refused to leave his property, and once the car driving the guest arrived, he attempted to search it without a warrant. Boule says he stepped between the car and Egbert, at which point the agent shoved him, “grabbed him and pushed him to the ground.” Boule says the encounter left him with back and hip injuries severe enough to require him to seek medical treatment. Egbert ultimately concluded the guest was in the country lawfully and left. Boule alleges that when he complained to Egbert’s supervisor about the incident, Egbert contacted the IRS, who then investigated Boule’s business. In 2017, Boule sued Egbert for violating his First and Fourth Amendment rights. The claim has since worked its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which will hear oral arguments on Wednesday. The justices’ decision could have sweeping implications far beyond the two men’s dispute. A broad court ruling could shape whether and how federal Border Patrol agents—or federal law enforcement officers generally—can be sued for alleged wrongdoing. “This case goes to the heart of the rule of law and fundamental principles of constitutional accountability,” says David H. Gans, the director of the human rights, civil rights and citizenship program at the progressive Constitutional Accountability Center, which filed a brief in support of Boule. The case hinges on the 1971 Supreme Court decision _Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents_, which allowed federal lawsuits to be brought against federal officers who violate the Constitution. In the decades since _Bivens_, the high court has slowly watered down the case’s power, most recently in a 2020 decision, _Hernández v. Mesa,_ which found that lawsuits against federal border patrol agents cannot be brought in the instance of a cross-border shooting. In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas [argued](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/17-1678%5Fm6io.pdf) that “the time has come to consider discarding the _Bivens_ doctrine altogether.”  A border patrol patch on an officer's uniform on Oct. 26, 2017. John Gibbins—The San Diego Union-Tribune/TNS/Alamy In his petition before the high court, Egbert asked the Supreme Court to do just that. While the justices declined to reconsider the constitutionality of _Bivens_ entirely, they agreed to hear whether Boule has grounds to bring his lawsuit. Egbert argues that _Bivens_ does not give Boule the authority to sue a federal officer, and a district could agreed with him. The 9th Circuit overruled that decision in 2020\. The Supreme Court will now determine who was right. “It’s a really extreme position,” says Cecillia Wang, the deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which filed a brief in support of Boule. “\[Egbert\] says basically if your constitutional rights are violated by a federal police officer, you’re out of luck.” In court filings, Boule admits that people have used the property of his B&B—which is cheekily called The Smuggler’s Inn—“for illicit border crossings in both directions.” Vox [reports](https://www.vox.com/2022/3/1/22946305/supreme-court-egbert-boule-bivens-law-enforcement-constitution-border) that in 2018 Canada criminally charged Boule with allegedly helping foreign nationals illegally enter the country, although those charges were later dismissed. Egbert had reason to be on the property for “border patrol related operations,” says Jennifer Mascott, a professor at Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, who filed a brief in support of the agent. She argues there are several “administrative mechanisms” available for holding Egbert accountable for any wrongdoing beyond civil lawsuits against him, and says that the case raises crucial questions about the separation of powers between the high court and Congress. “\[The court’s\] going to be looking at: who decides? Is it them? Does the Supreme Court get to decide when damages are awarded? Or is it Congress?” Mascott says. She adds that in recent years, Congress has been hesitant to authorize lawsuits against law enforcement officers out of concern for officers’ well-being and job performance. They may be less likely to perform their job as they see fit if they feared federal lawsuits that could threaten their personal assets. The Biden Administration has filed a brief in the case taking a less extreme position than Egbert. DOJ officials argue that _Bivens_ does not grant Boule the authority to bring a lawsuit against a federal border patrol agent because the encounter was so close to the U.S.-Canada border. Wang of the ACLU argues the position is still a “gross expansion” of the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in _Hernández_, which was brought by a Mexican family against a border patrol agent who allegedly shot and killed their son across the Mexican border. The high court’s decision in that case addressed a cross-border situation. The incident between Boule and Egbert took place entirely in the United States. In their [brief](https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-147/211441/20220126141805658%5F21-147%20Egbert%20v%20Boule%20Amici%20Curiae%20Brief%20in%20Support%20of%20Respondent.pdf), the ACLU points out that U.S. Customs and Border Protection is the largest federal law enforcement agency, with an annual budget of $17.7 billion and statutory powers to conduct warrantless searches within 100 miles of U.S. borders—areas that encompass 65.3% of the U.S. population. “If the court reaches the conclusion that you can’t have _Bivens_ remedies against all border patrol agents,” Wang says, “it is letting the largest federal police agency in the country get away with misconduct with impunity.” It’s unclear how sweeping the court’s ruling will be. It could decide narrowly on the question of whether Boule can sue Egbert. Or it could decide broadly and reshape the legal tools available to Americans to hold federal law enforcement officers accountable when they violate the Constitution. ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/6153164/supreme-court-sue-federal-officers/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/6153164/supreme-court-sue-federal-officers/"},"headline":"The Supreme Court Could Soon Decide When a Federal Officer Can Be Sued","datePublished":"2022-03-01T22:24:00.000Z","dateModified":"2026-05-11T04:54:28.195Z","description":"A broad ruling could shape whether and how federal border patrol agents—or federal officers generally—can be sued for alleged wrongdoing.","url":"https://time.com/6153164/supreme-court-sue-federal-officers/","keywords":["justice"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltae6f64e3799c6ad2/698a231d656a3f3b31bdc43d/scotus-egbert-boule-court-case-sue-federal-agents-legislation.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Madeleine Carlisle","jobTitle":null,"url":"https://time.com/author/madeleine-carlisle/"}],"articleSection":"Politics","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/bltae6f64e3799c6ad2/698a231d656a3f3b31bdc43d/scotus-egbert-boule-court-case-sue-federal-agents-legislation.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"A scene of the U.S. Supreme Court building on January 26, 2022 in Washington, DC.","caption":"A scene of the U.S. Supreme Court building on January 26, 2022 in Washington, DC.","creditText":"Chip Somodevilla—Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/politics/","name":"Politics"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/justice/","name":"justice"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/6153164/supreme-court-sue-federal-officers/","name":"The Supreme Court Could Soon Decide When a Federal Officer Can Be Sued"}}]}] ```