Summary (tl;dr)

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal from former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, effectively ending his lawsuit against former FBI Director James Comey and other officials over alleged unlawful surveillance during the 2016 Russia investigation.

Essential Background

Carter Page served as an informal foreign-policy adviser to Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. During the FBI's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and potential ties to the Trump campaign, the bureau obtained four warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to electronically surveil Page. A subsequent report by the Justice Department's internal watchdog identified 17 "significant errors and omissions" in the FBI's applications for these warrants, particularly criticizing the reliance on the unverified "Steele dossier." Despite the surveillance, Page was never charged with any wrongdoing. In November 2020, Page filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government, the Department of Justice, the FBI, and several former officials, including James Comey, alleging that his constitutional and legal rights were violated by the unlawful surveillance.

The Full Story

On Monday, the Supreme Court turned away Carter Page's attempt to revive his lawsuit, leaving intact lower court rulings that had dismissed his case. This decision effectively concludes Page's efforts to hold individual former FBI officials, such as James Comey and former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, personally liable for the surveillance. Both the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia had previously dismissed Page's claims, primarily on the grounds that they were barred by a three-year statute of limitations. Page had contended that the statute of limitations should have begun when the inspector general's report was released in 2019, rather than when news of the surveillance first became public. Separately, the Trump administration had reached a $1.25 million settlement with Page in April to resolve his claims against the U.S. government under the PATRIOT Act, but this agreement did not cover his claims against individual FBI officials.

Why It Matters

The Supreme Court's decision marks a final legal defeat for Carter Page in his bid to seek personal accountability from the specific FBI officials involved in the surveillance. This ruling underscores the importance of statutes of limitations in legal challenges, even when government misconduct has been acknowledged. The case has been a focal point in the broader national conversation surrounding government surveillance powers, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), and concerns about potential abuses of power within politically charged investigations. While Page received a settlement from the U.S. government for certain claims, the Supreme Court's refusal to hear his appeal closes the door on holding individuals like Comey personally liable, despite the Justice Department's watchdog finding significant flaws in the FISA warrant applications.

Geographic Location

• Washington, D.C., District of Columbia, United States (Supreme Court declined to hear appeal, U.S. District Court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia previously dismissed lawsuit)