Suing the federal government is ridiculously hard. It shouldn’t be that way.
Looking at the history of the U.S. founding and how this country originated by defying overbearing authority, one would think that suing the government for rights violations would be rather straightforward. It is not. Instead, it’s a Kafkaesque nightmare that often leaves Americans unprotected and with untold damage left unrepaired in the face of government force.
As the Trump administration continues with its mass deportations (a program that has swept up U.S. citizens as well), Americans are made to confront the harsh reality of our legal system: Suing the government is incredibly hard, and government actors wielding force inappropriately against individuals often go unpunished. This shouldn’t happen in America of all places.
The American founding was, at its core, an act of defiance against unchecked power. The colonists were subject to arbitrary taxation, warrantless searches, standing armies in their homes, and other evils at the hands of the crown. After petitions failed, they declared independence and eventually crafted a Constitution designed to constrain government power and place individual freedom beyond the reach of government whim. But almost 250 years later, it has become increasingly hard to hold the government accountable for violations of the rights of Americans.
This has become shockingly clear as immigration enforcement ramps up under the Trump administration. As the Washington Post reported last week, many individuals who have been harmed by immigration enforcement agents are having a hard time navigating the maze that is holding the government responsible. Such harm includes allegations of property damage caused by agents breaking into private property, chokeholds and other physical mistreatment, unlawful detentions of citizens for days, and even death (in the case of Renee Good, the American citizen shot by ICE in Minneapolis). “It is arguably harder today in 2026 than at any other time in American history to sue federal officials for money damages if they violate your constitutional rights,” Harrison Stark, senior counsel at the State Democracy Research Initiative at University of Wisconsin Law School, told the Washington Post.
It’s hard to sue the federal government due to the tortuous process imposed by legislation and Supreme Court precedent. In most cases, victims cannot go straight to court. Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, they must first file a claim with the very agency that caused the harm and wait up to six months for a response. Only after the agency denies (or ignores) the claim can they file a lawsuit. Even then, the case is decided by a judge, not a jury, damages tend to be limited, and the individual officers involved cannot be sued personally.
The path is also narrow for constitutional violations. Although the Supreme Court once recognized a way to sue federal officers for violating constitutional rights (the Bivens doctrine, 1971), recent decisions have greatly restricted that option, making new Bivens claims difficult. Marie Miller, an attorney at the Institute for Justice representing a U.S. citizen detained by ICE, explains that the Court has pulled back on that doctrine, making it difficult to sue.
Miller represents George Retes, who was detained by ICE when he came across an immigration enforcement operation last year and was held incommunicado for three days. He alleges grotesque violations to his constitutional rights, but hasn’t yet been able to sue the government due to the FTCA requirement. He doesn’t even know the names of the individual agents involved in his detention.
Agents enjoy broad protections even in the face of potentially serious wrongdoing. Government immunity defenses often lead to dismissal before a case ever reaches trial. This is part of the reason why immigration agents feel empowered to act with impunity, often threatening people out in the open.
Misconduct by immigration enforcement agents didn’t begin with Trump (and neither did rights violations by the government in other areas). For example, under Barack Obama, Joe Biden, investigations, complaints, and lawsuits have repeatedly alleged serious abuses in immigration enforcement and detention, ranging from excessive force to sexual abuse allegations and retaliation or neglect in custody.
This is unconscionable. The American system of government originated on the premise that government exists solely to protect individual rights. “To secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men…,” reads the Declaration of Independence. This is a sacred mission that our government has largely abandoned. The fact that it’s so awfully hard to get justice for such violations makes matters even worse.
Some states are trying to rein in these abuses and hold officers accountable, but these measures will face challenges if they pass. Earlier this month, the California Senate passed the “No Kings Act,” which would allow civil rights lawsuits against individual officers. The DOJ has already sued Illinois for a similar measure.
The best solution to this outrageously un-American problem is for Congress to act. Previous legislative efforts have gone nowhere. One such effort is the Bivens Act, introduced by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, and Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Georgia. An earlier version introduced in 2024 died without action at the end of the congressional session. The bill was reintroduced in November 2025 and has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee, where it awaits action.
Holding our government accountable, which goes to the core of America’s identity, should not be a partisan issue, but an American issue. The long-standing need for avenues to sue the federal government and its agents is evident now, but it needs to be addressed immediately if we want to be a truly free country in the future.
Agustina Vergara Cid is a columnist for the Southern California News Group. Follow her on X: @agustinavcid