28 U.S.C. § 2680

Exceptions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar
The provisions of this chapter and section 1346(b) of this title shall not apply to—(a) Any claim based upon an act or omission of an employee of the Government, exercising due care, in the execution of a statute or regulation, whether or not such statute or regulation be valid, or based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty on the part of a federal agency or an employee of the Government, whether or not the discretion involved be abused.(b) Any claim arising out of the loss, miscarriage, or negligent transmission of letters or postal matter.(c) Any claim arising in respect of the assessment or collection of any tax or customs duty, or the detention of any goods, merchandise, or other property by any officer of customs or excise or any other law enforcement officer, except that the provisions of this chapter and section 1346(b) of this title apply to any claim based on injury or loss of goods, merchandise, or other property, while in the possession of any officer of customs or excise or any other law enforcement officer, if—(1) the property was seized for the purpose of forfeiture under any provision of Federal law providing for the forfeiture of property other than as a sentence imposed upon conviction of a criminal offense;(2) the interest of the claimant was not forfeited;(3) the interest of the claimant was not remitted or mitigated (if the property was subject to forfeiture); and(4) the claimant was not convicted of a crime for which the interest of the claimant in the property was subject to forfeiture under a Federal criminal forfeiture law..11 So in original.(d) Any claim for which a remedy is provided by chapter 309 or 311 of title 46 relating to claims or suits in admiralty against the United States.(e) Any claim arising out of an act or omission of any employee of the Government in administering the provisions of sections 1–31 of Title 50, Appendix.22 See References in Text note below.(f) Any claim for damages caused by the imposition or establishment of a quarantine by the United States.[(g) Repealed. Sept. 26, 1950, ch. 1049, § 13 (5), 64 Stat. 1043.](h) Any claim arising out of assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libel, slander, misrepresentation, deceit, or interference with contract rights: Provided, That, with regard to acts or omissions of investigative or law enforcement officers of the United States Government, the provisions of this chapter and section 1346(b) of this title shall apply to any claim arising, on or after the date of the enactment of this proviso, out of assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, abuse of process, or malicious prosecution. For the purpose of this subsection, “investigative or law enforcement officer” means any officer of the United States who is empowered by law to execute searches, to seize evidence, or to make arrests for violations of Federal law.(i) Any claim for damages caused by the fiscal operations of the Treasury or by the regulation of the monetary system.(j) Any claim arising out of the combatant activities of the military or naval forces, or the Coast Guard, during time of war.(k) Any claim arising in a foreign country.(l) Any claim arising from the activities of the Tennessee Valley Authority.(m) Any claim arising from the activities of the Panama Canal Company.(n) Any claim arising from the activities of a Federal land bank, a Federal intermediate credit bank, or a bank for cooperatives.(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 984; July 16, 1949, ch. 340, 63 Stat. 444; Sept. 26, 1950, ch. 1049, §§ 2(a)(2), 13(5), 64 Stat. 1038, 1043; Pub. L. 86–168, title II, § 202(b), Aug. 18, 1959, 73 Stat. 389; Pub. L. 93–253, § 2, Mar. 16, 1974, 88 Stat. 50; Pub. L. 106–185, § 3(a), Apr. 25, 2000, 114 Stat. 211; Pub. L. 109–304, § 17(f)(4), Oct. 6, 2006, 120 Stat. 1708.)Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 943 (Aug. 2, 1946, ch. 753, § 421, 60 Stat. 845).

Changes were made in phraseology.

Section 946 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., which was derived from section 424(b) of the Federal Tort Claims Act, was omitted from this revised title. It preserved the existing authority of federal agencies to settle tort claims not cognizable under section 2672 of this title. Certain enumerated laws granting such authority were specifically repealed by section 424(a) of the Federal Tort Claims Act, which section was also omitted from this revised title. These provisions were not included in this revised title as they are not properly a part of a code of general and permanent law.

Senate Revision Amendment

Sections 2680 and 2681 were renumbered “2679” and “2680”, respectively, by Senate amendment. See 80th Congress Senate Report No. 1559.

Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Sections 1–31 of Title 50, Appendix, referred to in subsec. (e), was in the original source of this section (section 943 of act Aug. 2, 1946) a reference to the Trading with the Enemy Act. The Trading with the Enemy Act is now comprised of sections 1 to 43, which were formerly classified to sections 1 to 6, 7 to 39, and 41 to 44 of the former Appendix to Title 50, War and National Defense, prior to editorial reclassification as chapter 53 (§ 4301 et seq.) of Title 50. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.

The date of the enactment of this proviso, referred to in subsec. (h), means Mar. 16, 1974, the date on which Pub. L. 93–253, which enacted the proviso, was approved.

Panama Canal Company, referred to in subsec. (m), deemed to refer to Panama Canal Commission, see section 3602(b)(5) of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.

Amendments

2006—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 109–304 substituted “chapter 309 or 311 of title 46” for “sections 741–752, 781–790 of Title 46,”.

2000—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 106–185 substituted “any goods, merchandise, or other property” for “any goods or merchandise” and “law enforcement” for “law-enforcement”, inserted “, except that the provisions of this chapter and section 1346(b) of this title apply to any claim based on injury or loss of goods, merchandise, or other property, while in the possession of any officer of customs or excise or any other law enforcement officer, if—”, and added pars. (1) to (4).

1974—Subsec. (h). Pub. L. 93–253 inserted proviso.

1959—Subsec. (n). Pub. L. 86–168 added subsec. (n).

1950—Subsec. (g). Act Sept. 26, 1950, § 13(5), repealed subsec. (g).

Subsec. (m). Act Sept. 26, 1950, § 2, substituted “Panama Canal Company” for “Panama Railroad Company”.

1949—Subsec. (m). Act July 16, 1949, added subsec. (m).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2000 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 106–185 applicable to any forfeiture proceeding commenced on or after the date that is 120 days after Apr. 25, 2000, see section 21 of Pub. L. 106–185, set out as a note under section 1324 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationality.

Effective Date of 1959 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 86–168 effective Jan. 1, 1960, see section 203(c) of Pub. L. 86–168.

Effective Date of 1950 Amendment

Amendment by act Sept. 26, 1950, to take effect upon effective date of transfer to the Panama Canal Company, pursuant to the provisions of section 256 of the former Canal Zone Code, as added by section 10 of that act, of the Panama Canal together with the facilities and appurtenances related thereto, see section 14 of act Sept. 26, 1950.

Transfer of Functions

For transfer of authorities, functions, personnel, and assets of the Coast Guard, including the authorities and functions of the Secretary of Transportation relating thereto, to the Department of Homeland Security, and for treatment of related references, see sections 468(b), 551(d), 552(d), and 557 of Title 6, Domestic Security, and the Department of Homeland Security Reorganization Plan of November 25, 2002, as modified, set out as a note under section 542 of Title 6.

Coast Guard transferred to Department of Transportation and all functions, powers, and duties, relating to Coast Guard, of Secretary of the Treasury and of all other offices and officers of Department of the Treasury transferred to Secretary of Transportation by Pub. L. 89–670, § 6(b)(1), Oct. 15, 1966, 80 Stat. 938. Section 6(b)(2) of Pub. L. 89–670, however, provided that notwithstanding such transfer of functions, Coast Guard shall operate as part of Navy in time of war or when President directs as provided in former section 3 (now 103) of Title 14, Coast Guard. See section 108 of Title 49, Transportation.

Northern Mariana Islands—Applicability of Subsec. (k)

Pub. L. 97–357, title II, § 204, Oct. 19, 1982, 96 Stat. 1708, provided: “That the Northern Mariana Islands shall not be considered a foreign country for purposes of subsection (k) of section 2680 of title 28, United States Code, with respect to claims which accrued no more than two years prior to the effective date of this Act [Oct. 19, 1982].”

Termination of National Emergency

Declaration of national emergency in effect on Sept. 14, 1976, was terminated two years from that date by section 1601 of Title 50, War and National Defense.

Applicability of Subsec. (j)

Joint Res. July 3, 1952, ch. 570, § 1(a)(32), 66 Stat. 333, as amended by Joint Res. Mar. 31, 1953, ch. 13, § 1, 67 Stat. 18, and Joint Res. June 30, 1953, ch. 172, 67 Stat. 132, provided that subsec. (j) of this section, in addition to coming into full force and effect in time of war, should continue in force until six months after the termination of the national emergency proclaimed by the President on Dec. 16, 1950 by 1950 Proc. No. 2914, 15 F.R. 9029, set out as a note preceding section 1 of Title 50, War and National Defense, or such earlier date or dates as may be provided for by Congress, but in no event beyond Aug. 1, 1953. Section 7 of Joint Res. July 3, 1952, provided that it should become effective June 16, 1952.

Joint Res. July 3, 1952, ch. 570, § 6, 66 Stat. 334, repealed Joint Res. Apr. 14, 1952, ch. 204, 66 Stat. 54 as amended by Joint Res. May 28, 1952, ch. 339, 66 Stat. 96; Joint Res. June 14, 1952, ch. 437, 66 Stat. 137; Joint Res. June 30, 1952, ch. 526, 66 Stat. 296, which continued provisions of subsec. (j) of this section until July 3, 1952. This repeal was made effective June 16, 1952, by section 7 of Joint Res. July 3, 1952.

Executive DocumentsTransfer of Functions

For transfer of certain functions relating to claims and litigation, insofar as they pertain to the Air Force, from Secretary of the Army to Secretary of the Air Force, see Secretary of Defense Transfer Order No. 34 [§ 1a(2)(4)], eff. July 1, 1949.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5,771 cases (1,128 in the last 5 years), 1948–2026 · leading case: Ali v. Federal Bureau of Prisons
Ali v. Federal Bureau of Prisons (2008) scotus · cites it 26× “This case concerns the scope of 28 U.S.C. § 2680 , which carves out certain exceptions to the United States' waiver of sovereign immunity for torts committed by federal employees.”
Snyder & Associates Acquisitions LLC v. United States (2017) ca9 · cites it 21× “The panel held that 28 U.S.C. § 2680 (c) does not confer absolute immunity on the IRS, and, construing the facts in a light most favorable to appellees, the sting operation did not “aris[e] in respect of the assessment or collection of any tax.”
Nadine Pellegrino v. TSA (2019) ca3 · cites it 26× “28 U.S.C. § 2680 (h) does so for specific intentional torts committed by “investigative or law enforcement officers,” which it defines as “any officer of the United States who is empowered by law to execute searches, to seize evidence, or to make arrests for violations of…”
Pellegrino v. U.S. Transp. SEC. Admin. (2018) ca3 · cites it 38× “” 28 U.S.C. § 2680 (h). Pellegrino’s claims may proceed only if TSA screeners fall into this category.”
Saleh v. Titan Corp. (2009) cadc · cites it 20× “It looked to the FTCA's exemption to the waiver of sovereign immunity for claims "based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty on the part of a federal agency or employee of the Government, whether or not the…”
Brian Iverson v. United States (2020) ca8 · cites it 17× “28 U.S.C. § 2680 (h). The central question here is whether Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screening personnel, known as Transportation Security Officers (TSOs), satisfy the FTCA’s definition of an investigative or law enforcement officer.”
Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain (2004) scotus · cites it 10× “§ 878 , setting out the arrest authority of the DEA, and it says that in any event the liability asserted here falls within the FTCA exception to waiver of sovereign immunity for claims "arising in a foreign country," 28 U. S. C. § 2680 (k). We think the exception applies and…”
Davinci Aircraft, Inc. v. United States (2019) ca9 · cites it 11× “See 28 U.S.C. § 2680 . Separately, the Tucker Act grants exclusive jurisdiction to the Court of Federal Claims for actions “sounding in contract” against the United States.”
Carlson v. Green (1980) scotus · cites it 10× “[5] FTCA was enacted long before Bivens was decided, but when Congress amended FTCA in 1974 to create a cause of action against the United States for intentional torts committed by federal law enforcement officers, 28 U. S. C. § 2680 (h), the congressional comments accompanying…”
Gonzalez Ex Rel. A.F. v. United States (2016) ca9 · cites it 12× “28 U.S.C. § 2680 (a). We consider whether, under Attorney General guidelines, the FBI’s failure to disclose information to local law enforcement regarding a home invasion threatened by private persons against unspecified victims constitutes a “failure to exercise or perform a…”
Sheridan v. United States (1988) scotus · cites it 16× “The question we granted certiorari to decide is whether petitioners' claim is one "arising out of" an assault or battery within the meaning of 28 U. S. C. § 2680 (h). [1] I When it granted the Government's motion to dismiss, the District Court accepted petitioners' version of…”
Butz v. Economou (1978) scotus · cites it 8× “In fact, Congress, making just these sorts of judgments with respect to the very causes of action which the Court suggests require abrogation of absolute immunity, has amended the Federal Tort Claims Act, see 28 U. S. C. § 2680 (h) (1976 ed.), to allow suits against the United…”
— 28 U.S.C. § 2680(a) — 39 cases
— 28 U.S.C. § 2680(b) — 1 case
Konan v. USPS (2024) ca5
— 28 U.S.C. § 2680(c) — 4 cases
— 28 U.S.C. § 2680(d) — 2 cases
— 28 U.S.C. § 2680(h) — 47 cases
— 28 U.S.C. § 2680(k) — 1 case
— 28 U.S.C. § 2680(li) — 1 case
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.