By Ross Marchand
The US Postal Service (USPS) is financially struggling and extremely inappropriate. But agents can still cause trouble for vulnerable Americans. From digital snooping of protesters to legitimate testing of political products to law enforcement mission creep, USPS needs lessons of accountability. The problem is that the agency believes it exceeds the law and cannot answer its actions. The Supreme Court has a historic opportunity to change this apologetic state and give Americans a day in court. It’s time for the USPS to face long extended accountability before the bench.
Texas landlord Leven Conan learned about USPS’ dislike of accountability in a difficult way. Conan, a rent for black and white tenants, is said to be the victim of a long-standing harassment campaign by two local postal workers who did not like interracial rentals. As her legal team points out, “[t]His harassment campaign began when local postal carrier Rojas changed the designated owner of one of Mr. Conan’s property to one of his white tenants. …When Conan complained to the local post office, the USPS inspector confirmed it. [she] However, the local postmaster only escalated from that order. The local postmaster marked her email as “undelivered.”
The good news is that under the Federal Tort Claims Act of 1946 (FTCA), plaintiffs may file a civil action in federal court “in circumstances in which the United States is committed, they are liable for the plaintiff pursuant to the law or the law where the omission occurred.” The bad news is “[a]NY claims claims arising from the communication of loss of letters or mail, miscarriage or negligence. “This postal loophole protects USPS from liability, even when it causes harm to patients by losing the drug.
But the government asks for something different. According to the Department of Justice, holding mail predators liable under the FTCA would be free to create a case that says, “people who lose or get mistaken about emails could lead to federal tort lawsuits and could proceed to potentially troubling findings about the theory of intentional tampering.” This is a stupid argument designed to remove the USPS from the hook for what USPS is wrong. The reality is that there is a (naturally) world of difference that claims that email is too late, and that it claims a series of coordinated efforts to disrupt communication. As Konan’s legal team correctly points out, only a small portion of complaints against American postal carriers are ominous enough to compare it to Konan’s light letter, and perhaps not worthy of plaintiffs to pursue in court.
<
Even if a simple FTCA read is keeping USPS down at greater legal costs. After all, labor law costs litigation, so few people argue that agencies should be able to retaliate against whistleblowers. And virtually every dissatisfied driver agrees that USPS truck drivers should remain legally responsible for reckless driving.
Hopefully, the Supreme Court agrees that the court has given a “frightening campaign” that will benefit at least one day in the USPS against Ms Conan. It’s time to bring accountability to American postal carriers.
Ross Marchand is a senior researcher at the Taxpayer Protection Union.
