Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
Democrats on Capitol Hill are renewing a long-stalled push to let Americans sue federal law enforcement officers for violating their constitutional rights, seizing on recent allegations of excessive force and unlawful conduct by agents carrying out President Donald Trump’s intensified immigration crackdown.
The legislation — reintroduced Tuesday by Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga., and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I. — would clarify that a key civil rights statute applies not only to state and local officials but also to federal agents. Supporters say the move is needed to restore a legal pathway the U.S. Supreme Court has steadily narrowed over the past decade.
A renewed push amid federal overreach allegations
The proposal would amend a Reconstruction-era law to make clear that federal officials may be sued individually for constitutional violations. Johnson said recent encounters between federal agents and civilians, including immigrants, legal residents and protesters, have underscored the urgency.
“Under this lawless administration, federal officers are using excessive force and violating constitutional rights in our streets with impunity,” Johnson said in a statement. “If federal officials violate the Constitution, they should be held accountable, full stop.”
The Trump administration has mounted an aggressive immigration enforcement campaign since January, sparking accusations from civil rights groups that agents are engaging in unlawful entries, excessive force and other misconduct. A federal judge in Chicago this month issued an injunction limiting agents’ use of force in response to those claims.
GOP senators face scrutiny over shutdown provision
The bill’s reintroduction coincides with controversy surrounding Republican senators whose phone records were obtained by the Justice Department without their knowledge. A provision in the recent government funding deal would allow eight GOP lawmakers to pursue civil claims against DOJ, a move Democrats say highlights the uneven landscape for accountability.
Legal backdrop: Bivens narrowed, victims shut out
A 1971 Supreme Court decision — Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents — established that federal officers could be individually liable for certain constitutional violations. But the court has since curtailed that doctrine, ruling in 2022 that Border Patrol agents may not be sued individually.
Lower courts have relied heavily on that decision. In the year that followed, constitutional claims were dismissed in 195 of 228 cases in which defendants cited the ruling, an NBC News investigation previously found.
Whitehouse said the new bill “would reopen the courthouse doors to these victims and encourage more responsible conduct by federal officials.”
Limited remedies under current law
People may currently sue the federal government under the Federal Tort Claims Act, but those cases cap damages and provide no option for a jury trial — limits supporters say undermine meaningful accountability.
Although Democrats have introduced similar legislation in prior sessions, it has struggled to gain traction in a divided Congress. Johnson and Whitehouse argue that the mounting evidence of dismissed claims and unchecked conduct gives the measure fresh momentum.
Next steps
Advocates expect committee consideration later this year, though its prospects remain uncertain amid partisan tensions and resistance from Republicans who argue the measure could open federal officers to excessive litigation.
