United States Postal Service, et al., Petitioners v. Lebene Konan

The case asked whether a lawsuit over postal workers' intentional refusal to deliver mail falls within the Federal Tort Claims Act's postal-matter exception. The Supreme Court said it does, reversing the Fifth Circuit and blocking Konan's suit against the United States.

The Court reversed the Fifth Circuit, but the vote count and opinion lineup are not provided here.

Majority

Thomas

Roberts

Alito

Kavanaugh

Barrett

Dissent

Sotomayor

Kagan

Gorsuch

Jackson

The decision gives the Postal Service and the federal government broader protection from damages suits over undelivered mail, even when the plaintiff says the nondelivery was intentional. That affects people like landlords, tenants, and businesses who say postal employees withheld delivery to a specific address.

The Fifth Circuit and lower courts must apply the Supreme Court's reading of the postal exception in similar cases. Konan's case cannot move forward on that federal damages theory against the United States, and agencies and litigants will adjust to the broader shield from suit.

The dispute was whether intentional refusal to deliver mail counts as a "loss" or "miscarriage" of postal matter. The Court said that kind of claim falls within the postal exception.

People and businesses claiming the Postal Service intentionally withheld delivery may have a harder time seeking money damages from the federal government. That includes property owners relying on regular delivery to specific addresses.

Lower courts must follow this interpretation in future postal nondelivery cases. Konan's lawsuit is blocked on this federal theory, and similar claims will face the same barrier.