Americans can't sue USPS, even if mail is intentionally not delivered, Supreme Court rules

FILE - A U.S. Post Office truck sits parked in a suburban neighborhood  February 10, 2022 in NORTH HALEDON, NJ.  (Photo by Michael Bocchieri/Getty Images)

The Supreme Court ruled this week that Americans can’t sue the U.S. Postal Service, even if a USPS employee intentionally refuses to deliver your mail. 

The case centered around a Black Texas landlord who claimed her mail was deliberately withheld for two years because of her race. 

United States Postal Service v. Lebene Konan

The backstory:

The case involves Euless, Texas landlord Lebene Konan, who’s also a real estate agent and an insurance agent. She claims two employees at her local post office deliberately held back mail belonging to her and her tenants. She said it’s because they didn’t like that she is Black and rents properties to white people. 

RELATED: Supreme Court rules Trump's tariffs violated federal law

The dispute started when the mailbox key for one of Konan’s rental properties was changed without her permission. When she contacted the local post office, she was told she would have to prove she owned the property in order to receive a new key. She showed them proof, but the mail delivery problems persisted, eventually costing her rental income when tenants moved out because of the mail situation, she claimed. 

How They Voted:

Supreme Court justices voted 5-4 in favor of the Postal Service. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion for the five conservative justices. Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch joined the high court’s three liberal colleagues in dissent.

What they're saying:

Thomas said the federal law that generally shields the Postal Service from lawsuits over missing, lost and undelivered mail includes "the intentional nondelivery of mail."

RELATED: Supreme Court unanimously rebukes lower court's handling of Whole Foods baby food case

President Donald Trump’s administration warned that the cash-strapped Postal Service could be flooded with similar lawsuits if the judges ruled in favor of Konan. 

The other side:

In the dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that while the protection against lawsuits is broad, it doesn’t cover a decision not to deliver mail that’s "driven by malicious reasons." 

Konan filed more than 50 complaints to USPS before she sued under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which allows some lawsuits against the government.

The Source: This report includes information from The Associated Press.

Supreme CourtU.S.Consumer