Former Trump campaign adviser asks high court to decide whether federal officials can be sued over alleged abuses in securing surveillance warrants.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Litigation stemming from the FBI’s 2016 investigation into alleged Russian election interference has reached the U.S. Supreme Court, presenting the justices with a question about whether federal officials can be held personally liable for alleged misconduct in obtaining surveillance warrants.
As first detailed by Just the News, the case arises from a lawsuit filed by Carter Page, a former foreign policy adviser to President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign. Page alleges that senior federal officials violated his constitutional rights by submitting false or misleading information to secure a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA).
Page became a subject of the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation known as Crossfire Hurricane, which examined possible Russian interference in the 2016 election. In 2020, he filed a federal lawsuit seeking damages from then-FBI Director James Comey, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and other officials.
He contends that the applications submitted to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court contained “multiple errors, omissions, and misstatements that the FBI later concluded vitiated its showing of probable cause,” according to filings by his attorneys.
Page sought hundreds of millions of dollars in damages, asserting that the surveillance damaged his professional reputation and career. Federal courts dismissed the lawsuit. While the Justice Department acknowledged significant errors in the FISA process related to Page, the courts concluded that those mistakes did not entitle him to monetary damages from the named officials.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed the dismissal, prompting Page to file a petition with the Supreme Court on Dec. 11, 2025. The case is docketed as Carter Page v. James B. Comey for the Court’s 2025–2026 term.
The government has received permission to delay its response to the petition until mid-March. The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether it will grant review.
In his petition, Page argues that the case raises significant civil liberties concerns and that individuals subjected to allegedly improper FISA surveillance should have a pathway to seek damages. His legal team also alleges that two agents leaked information about the surveillance to the press, resulting in an April 2017 article in The Washington Post.
If the Court agrees to hear the case, it would provide the justices an opportunity to address the scope of federal officials’ immunity in the context of national security investigations and alleged constitutional violations tied to FISA warrants.
For now, the matter remains under consideration as the Court determines whether to place the case on its merits docket.
Original article
Comments