The Daily Populous Wednesday February 25th, 2026 morning edition
Authored by apnews.com and submitted by 20_mile

Add AP News as your preferred source to see more of our stories on Google.

Add AP News on Google Add AP News as your preferred source to see more of our stories on Google. Share

WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that Americans can’t sue the U.S. Postal Service, even when employees deliberately refuse to deliver mail.

By a 5-4 vote, the justices ruled against a Texas landlord, Lebene Konan, who alleges her mail was intentionally withheld for two years. Konan, who is Black, claims racial prejudice played a role in postal employees’ actions.

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for a majority of five conservative justices, said the federal law that generally shields the Postal Service from lawsuits over missing, lost and undelivered mail includes “the intentional nondelivery of mail.”

In dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that while the protection against lawsuits is broad, it does not extend to situations when the decision not to deliver mail “was driven by malicious reasons.” Justice Neil Gorsuch joined his three liberal colleagues in dissent.

President Donald Trump’s Republican administration had warned that a ruling for Konan would have led to a flood of similar lawsuits against the cash-strapped Postal Service.

Konan, who’s also a real estate agent and an insurance agent, claims two employees at a post office in Euless, Texas, part of the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, deliberately didn’t deliver mail belonging to her and her tenants because, she alleges, they didn’t like that she is Black and owns multiple properties.

According to court documents, the dispute began when Konan discovered the mailbox key for one of her rental properties had been changed without her knowledge, preventing her from collecting and distributing tenants’ mail from the box. When she contacted the local post office, she was told she wouldn’t receive a new key or regular delivery until she proved she owned the property. She did so, the documents say, but the mail problems continued, despite the USPS inspector general instructing the mail to be delivered.

Konan alleges the employees marked some of the mail as undeliverable or return to sender. Konan and her tenants failed to receive important mail such as bills, medications and car titles, according to the lawsuit. Konan also claims she lost rental income because some tenants moved out due to the situation.

After filing dozens of complaints with postal officials, Konan finally filed a lawsuit under the 1946 Federal Tort Claims Act, which allows some lawsuits against the government. The case focused on the reach of the special postal exemption to the law.

Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.

Squeaky_Ben on February 24th, 2026 at 21:53 UTC »

"Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for a majority of five conservative justices, said the federal law that generally shields the Postal Service from lawsuits over missing, lost and undelivered mail includes “the intentional nondelivery of mail.”"

HUUUUHHH???

How does that make any sense.

As the person sending mail, you pay for postage, isn't that a contract that is then willfully breached?!

whatproblems on February 24th, 2026 at 21:43 UTC »

so some mail man could be like nah i hate that guy and just not deliver mail and there’s no recourse???

Niceromancer on February 24th, 2026 at 21:37 UTC »

What a totally weird thing to rule right before midterms.