The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Monday in *United States Postal Service v. Konan*, holding that the Federal Tort Claims Act's postal exception shields the United States Postal Service from liability for allegedly intentional mail withholding.

Writing for the majority, Justice Thomas resolved a circuit split by determining that the postal exception covers both negligent and intentional misconduct by postal employees. Justice Sotomayor authored the dissenting opinion.

The case arose from an extended dispute between Lebene Konan and the local post office in Euless, Texas, concerning mail delivery to two rental properties owned by Konan. According to court records, Konan alleged that United States Postal Service employees intentionally withheld her mail and interfered with its delivery to the rental properties.

After administrative complaints proved unsuccessful, Konan sued the United States in federal court, bringing various state-law tort claims alleging that the postal service intentionally and wrongfully withheld her mail. The lawsuit sought to hold the government accountable for what Konan characterized as deliberate interference with mail delivery.

The U.S. District Court dismissed Konan's complaint, relying on the Federal Tort Claims Act's postal exception. Under 28 U.S.C. §2680(b), the federal government cannot be sued for claims "arising out of the loss, miscarriage, or negligent transmission of letters or postal matter."

The Supreme Court's ruling means that Konan's case is definitively dismissed and establishes that postal employees' intentional misconduct falls within the exception's protection. The Court determined that both "miscarriage" and "loss" of mail can result from intentional conduct, not just negligence.

The decision affects future accountability lawsuits against postal service operations by clarifying that the postal exception provides broad immunity even for deliberate wrongdoing by postal workers.