Lawsuit Argues Postal Service Withheld Mail for 2 Years

As a general rule, it's difficult to sue the US Postal Service for lost, delayed, or mishandled mail. But a case before the US Supreme Court involving a Texas landlord who claims her mail was deliberately withheld for two years is looking to challenge that, the AP reports, in a proceeding the cash-strapped Postal Service says could prompt a deluge of lawsuits over the very common, if frustrating, phenomenon of missing mail. That concern takes on particular resonance during the holiday season, when the volume of mail—billions of sentimental items including Christmas cards and Black Friday purchases—ramps up.

• The tort law: The case focuses on whether the postal exemption to the Federal Tort Claims Act applies when postal employees intentionally fail to deliver letters and packages. "We're going to be faced with, I think, a ton of suits about mail," Frederick Liu, assistant to the solicitor general for the Department of Justice, warned the justices during oral arguments last month. He predicted that if the landlord wins the case, people will infer their mail didn't arrive "because of a rude comment that they heard, or what have you." The tort law allows private individuals to sue the government for monetary damages if a federal employee hurts them or damages their property by acting negligently. But Congress created multiple exceptions to the law, including one for the Postal Service, shielding it from lawsuits over missing or late mail. The exception says the post office can't be sued for "loss, miscarriage or negligent transmission of letters or postal matter."

• At the Supreme Court: Definitions of those words have become the crux of the case before the Supreme Court, which is expected to decide the case next year after the USPS appealed a lower-court ruling. Last month, some justices appeared to question the government's claim that USPS is shielded from such lawsuits. But concern was expressed about opening the doors to frivolous litigation. Justice Samuel Alito suggested people might believe carriers intentionally didn't deliver mail because they didn't receive a tip at Christmas or they were scared by a dog. "What will the consequences be if all these suits are filed and they have to be litigated?" Alito asked. "Is the cost of a first-class letter going to be $3 now?" Easha Anand, a lawyer for the landlord, has accused the government of "fearmongering about endless litigation." She argued it's unusual for someone to experience the level of mistreatment Lebene Konan did and contends the USPS would still retain immunity for most postal matter-related harms even if the court rules in the landlord's favor.

• The accusation: Konan, a landlord, claims two employees at a post office in Euless, Texas, deliberately didn't deliver mail belonging to her and her tenants because they didn't like that she is Black and owns multiple properties. According to court documents, Konan discovered the mailbox key for one of her rental properties had been changed without her knowledge, preventing her from collecting and distributing tenants' mail from the box. When she contacted the local post office, she was told she wouldn't receive a new key or regular delivery until she proved she owned the property. She did so, the documents say, but the mail problems continued, despite the USPS Inspector General instructing the mail to be delivered. Konan alleges the employees marked some of the mail as undeliverable or return to sender. She and her tenants failed to receive important mail such as bills, medications, and car titles, according to the lawsuit.
• Outside view: Kevin Kosar of the American Enterprise Institute, a public policy think tank, who studies postal matters, disputes the government contention that the postal exemption covers the intentional failure to deliver mail. Kosar said he also doubts there will be a deluge of lawsuits if the court rules narrowly in the case, questioning whether aggrieved postal customers could even find an attorney willing to sue the USPS.