U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART I— CRIMES › Chapter CHAPTER 121— STORED WIRE AND ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AND TRANSACTIONAL RECORDS ACCESS

18 U.S.C. § 2712

Civil actions against the United States

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)In General.—Any person who is aggrieved by any willful violation of this chapter or of chapter 119 of this title or of sections 106(a), 305(a), or 405(a) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) may commence an action in United States District Court against the United States to recover money damages. In any such action, if a person who is aggrieved successfully establishes such a violation of this chapter or of chapter 119 of this title or of the above specific provisions of title 50, the Court may assess as damages—(1) actual damages, but not less than $10,000, whichever amount is greater; and(2) litigation costs, reasonably incurred.(b)Procedures.—(1) Any action against the United States under this section may be commenced only after a claim is presented to the appropriate department or agency under the procedures of the Federal Tort Claims Act, as set forth in title 28, United States Code.(2) Any action against the United States under this section shall be forever barred unless it is presented in writing to the appropriate Federal agency within 2 years after such claim accrues or unless action is begun within 6 months after the date of mailing, by certified or registered mail, of notice of final denial of the claim by the agency to which it was presented. The claim shall accrue on the date upon which the claimant first has a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation.(3) Any action under this section shall be tried to the court without a jury.(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the procedures set forth in section 106(f), 305(g), or 405(f) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) shall be the exclusive means by which materials governed by those sections may be reviewed.(5) An amount equal to any award against the United States under this section shall be reimbursed by the department or agency concerned to the fund described in section 1304 of title 31, United States Code, out of any appropriation, fund, or other account (excluding any part of such appropriation, fund, or account that is available for the enforcement of any Federal law) that is available for the operating expenses of the department or agency concerned.(c)Administrative Discipline.—If a court or appropriate department or agency determines that the United States or any of its departments or agencies has violated any provision of this chapter, and the court or appropriate department or agency finds that the circumstances surrounding the violation raise serious questions about whether or not an officer or employee of the United States acted willfully or intentionally with respect to the violation, the department or agency shall, upon receipt of a true and correct copy of the decision and findings of the court or appropriate department or agency promptly initiate a proceeding to determine whether disciplinary action against the officer or employee is warranted. If the head of the department or agency involved determines that disciplinary action is not warranted, he or she shall notify the Inspector General with jurisdiction over the department or agency concerned and shall provide the Inspector General with the reasons for such determination.(d)Exclusive Remedy.—Any action against the United States under this subsection shall be the exclusive remedy against the United States for any claims within the purview of this section.(e)Stay of Proceedings.—(1) Upon the motion of the United States, the court shall stay any action commenced under this section if the court determines that civil discovery will adversely affect the ability of the Government to conduct a related investigation or the prosecution of a related criminal case. Such a stay shall toll the limitations periods of paragraph (2) of subsection (b).(2) In this subsection, the terms “related criminal case” and “related investigation” mean an actual prosecution or investigation in progress at the time at which the request for the stay or any subsequent motion to lift the stay is made. In determining whether an investigation or a criminal case is related to an action commenced under this section, the court shall consider the degree of similarity between the parties, witnesses, facts, and circumstances involved in the 2 proceedings, without requiring that any one or more factors be identical.(3) In requesting a stay under paragraph (1), the Government may, in appropriate cases, submit evidence ex parte in order to avoid disclosing any matter that may adversely affect a related investigation or a related criminal case. If the Government makes such an ex parte submission, the plaintiff shall be given an opportunity to make a submission to the court, not ex parte, and the court may, in its discretion, request further information from either party.(Added Pub. L. 107–56, title II, § 223(c)(1), Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 294.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Sections 106, 305, and 405 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, referred to in subsecs. (a) and (b)(4), are classified to sections 1806, 1825, and 1845, respectively, of Title 50, War and National Defense.

The Federal Tort Claims Act, referred to in subsec. (b)(1), is title IV of act Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 753, 60 Stat. 842, which was classified principally to chapter 20 (§§ 921, 922, 931–934, 941–946) of former Title 28, Judicial Code and Judiciary. Title IV of act Aug. 2, 1946, was substantially repealed and reenacted as sections 1346(b) and 2671 et seq. of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, by act June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 992, the first section of which enacted Title 28. The Federal Tort Claims Act is also commonly used to refer to chapter 171 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure. For complete classification of title IV to the Code, see Tables. For distribution of former sections of Title 28 into the revised Title 28, see Table at the beginning of Title 28.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 2007–2025 · leading case: American Civil Liberties Union v. Clapper
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
American Civil Liberties Union v. Clapper (2015) ca2 · cites it 4× “The government also argues that 18 U.S.C. § 2712 impliedly precludes the relief appellants seek, either independently or in conjunction with the larger statutory framework established by the two provisions.”
Walsh v. Hagee (2012) dcd · cites it 6× “Constitution, and 18 U.S.C. § 2712 , and because Walsh failed to state a claim against the defendants upon which relief can be granted under 10 U.”
Klayman v. Obama (2013) dcd · cites it 4× “The text of Section 1861, and the structure and purpose of the FISA statutory scheme, as a whole, do indeed reflect Congress’s preclusive intent.”
Carter Page v. James Comey (2025) cadc · cites it 9× “After attempting to comply with mandatory prerequisites, 3 Page filed a second amended complaint on June 8, 2021, adding a claim against the United States for a violation of the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct…”
Kelley v. Federal Bureau of Investigation (2014) dcd · cites it 4× “at 14-16; see also 18 U.S.C. § 2712 (b) (“Any action against the United States under this section may be commenced only after a claim is presented to the appropriate department or agency under the procedures of the Federal Tort Claims Act, as set forth in title 28, United States…”
Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, Inc. v. Obama (2012) ca9 · cites it 6× “We need not comb the United States Code for disparate examples of sovereign immunity waivers; such examples-are available -closer to home within FISA.”
Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Barack Obama (2012) ca9 · cites it 5× “Although our decision is grounded solely in the text of the statute itself, the legislative history surrounding 18 U.S.C. § 2712 (a) further “confirms what we have concluded from the text alone.”
American Civil Liberties Union v. Clapper (2013) nysd · cites it 2× “” 18 U.S.C. § 2712 (d). Section 2712 allows a plaintiff to recover money damages for any “willful violation” of the Wiretap Act, the Stored Communications Act, and three provisions of FISA: (1) electronic wiretap surveillance; (2) physical searches; and (3) pen registers or trap…”
Jewel v. National Security Agency (2015) ca9 “Title 18 U.S.C. § 2712 applies to claims under the Stored Communications Act and the Wiretap Act, thus preempting the state secrets doctrine for those claims.”
Palmieri v. United States of America (2014) dcd · cites it 2× “15, 2014); see also 18 U.S.C. § 2712 (a), (d). Hence, the SCA does not provide a basis for Palmieri’s claim against the government.”
Jewel v. National Security Agency (2013) cand · cites it 2× “; see also 18 U.S.C. § 2712 (b)(4) (designating Section 1806(f) as “the exclusive means by which materials [designated as sensitive by the government] shall be reviewed” in suits against the United States under FISA, the Wiretap Act, and the Electronic Privacy Protection Act).”
Steven Warshak v. United States (2007) ca6 “18 U.S.C. § 2712 provides for monetary relief against the United States for violations of the SCA.”
Show all 39 citing cases →
— 18 U.S.C. § 2712(d) — 1 case
Klayman v. Obama (2013) dcd “The text of Section 1861, and the structure and purpose of the FISA statutory scheme, as a whole, do indeed reflect Congress’s preclusive intent.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.