WASHINGTON (AP) — In a contentious decision on Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled that Americans do not have the right to sue the U.S. Postal Service for intentional mail non-delivery.
By a narrow 5-4 vote, the justices sided against Lebene Konan, a Texas landlord who alleged that her mail was deliberately withheld for a period of two years. Konan, who is Black, contends that racial bias influenced the actions of postal employees.
Justice Clarence Thomas, speaking on behalf of the conservative majority, stated that the federal law protecting the Postal Service from liability in cases of missing mail also covers “the intentional nondelivery of mail.”
However, in dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor argued that the immunity from lawsuits should not apply in cases where mail non-delivery is motivated by malicious intent. Justice Neil Gorsuch joined the dissenting liberal justices.
The Trump administration cautioned that ruling in favor of Konan could open the floodgates to numerous similar lawsuits against the cash-strapped Postal Service.
Konan accused employees at a post office in Texas of purposefully neglecting to deliver mail to her and her tenants due to racial and property ownership bias.
The dispute began when Konan found that the mailbox key for one of her rental properties had been changed without her consent, leading to a series of mail delivery issues despite her efforts to rectify the situation.
Allegations include the marking of mail as undeliverable, resulting in significant consequences for Konan and her tenants, such as missed bills, medications, and car titles, as well as financial losses from tenants moving out.
After exhausting other avenues, Konan pursued legal action under the Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946, specifically focusing on the postal exemption within the law.
For more updates on the U.S. Supreme Court, visit https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.
