Supreme Court Rejects Carter Page Lawsuit Against Comey, June 16

The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Carter Page’s appeal to revive a lawsuit against former FBI Director James Comey and other FBI officials over surveillance conducted during the 2016 Russia investigation. Page, a foreign policy adviser to then-candidate Donald Trump, was wiretapped under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. A Justice Department inspector general report later found the warrant applications contained 17 significant errors and omissions.

Why the Court Rejected the Appeal

The Supreme Court rejected Page’s case in a brief order with no comment. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson did not participate in the deliberations. A federal appeals court in Washington, DC had ruled that the three-year statute of limitations barred Page’s claims against the individual FBI officials. Page filed suit in November 2020, arguing the clock should start from the inspector general’s report in 2019. Lower courts disagreed.

What the FISA Warrant Errors Revealed

The FBI obtained four wiretap warrants to monitor Page starting in October 2016. A Justice Department inspector general investigation found the bureau made 17 significant errors and omissions in the initial application and three renewal requests. The FBI relied heavily on the Steele dossier, opposition research containing unproven allegations about then-candidate Trump. The FBI later acknowledged it should have ended surveillance earlier.

The Partial Settlement and Remaining Claims

The Trump administration settled Page’s claims against the FBI and Department of Justice in April for $1.25 million. That settlement covered only claims under the PATRIOT Act, not allegations of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act violations. The remaining appeal involved claims against individual FBI officials who served under President Joe Biden’s administration. Page was never charged with any crime.

What Page Argued About the Statute of Limitations

Page contended the statute of limitations should begin running from the 2019 inspector general report, not from when the surveillance occurred. He warned that the appeals court decision created a Catch-22 where such lawsuits would either be dismissed as too speculative or as time-barred. The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case leaves the lower court ruling in place.

Final Thoughts

The Supreme Court’s rejection ends Page’s legal path to sue individual FBI officials over the surveillance. The statute of limitations ruling stands, setting a precedent for similar cases involving government surveillance claims.

FAQs

Disclaimer:

The content shared by Meyka AI PTY LTD is solely for research and informational purposes.  Meyka is not a financial advisory service, and the information provided should not be considered investment or trading advice.