Question: The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) waives the federal government's sovereign immunity concerning claims arising out of torts committed by federal employees. Therefore, the government generally can be sued for tort claims based on wrongful actions by federal employees. However, there are exceptions to this waiver of sovereign immunity. Where an exception applies, a tort claim cannot be brought against the government. One of the exceptions to the sovereign immunity waiver is set forth in FTCA § 2680(c). This exception is for "any claim arising in respect of the assessment or collection of any tax or customs duty, or the detention of any property by any officer of customs or excise or any other law enforcement officer."
When a prisoner was transferred from a federal prison in Georgia to another federal prison in Kentucky, he noticed that several items of religious and nostalgic significance were missing from his bags of personal property, which had been shipped to the new facility by the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP). Alleging that FBOP officers had lost his property, petitioner filed suit under the FTCA. The district court dismissed the claim, concluding that it was barred by § 2680(c) and its broad reference to "any other law enforcement officer." The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed. In doing so, the Eleventh Circuit rejected the prisoner's argument that the statutory phrase "any officer of customs or excise or any other law enforcement officer" applies only to officers enforcing customs or excise laws and not to the FBOP officers (who obviously were not acting as enforcers of customs or excise laws). The prisoner appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In rejecting the prisoner's argument, did the Eleventh Circuit correctly interpret § 2680(c)?