The Tucker Act
The Tucker Act: Monetary Claims Against the United States
Marzulla Law represents clients in cases involving monetary claims against the United States, including takings, breaches of federal contracts, tax refund suits, backpay cases brought by federal employees and members of the military, and patent and copyright infringement. According to the Tucker Act, all such cases are heard before the United States Court of Federal Claims.
What Is the Tucker Act?
Congress has placed the United States Court of Federal Claims, a court with national jurisdiction, in a unique position as the definitive arbiter of the Constitution’s promise that private property not “be taken for public use, without just compensation.” U.S. CONST. amend. V. The Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1491, is the jurisdictional statute for the Court, and vests exclusive jurisdiction to hear all monetary damages claims against the United States for specific categories of claims, including claims arising under the Fifth Amendment:
The United States [Court of Federal Claims] shall have jurisdiction to render judgment upon any claim against the United States founded either upon the Constitution, or any Act of Congress, or any regulation of an executive department, or upon any express or implied contract with the United States, or for liquidated or unliquidated damages not sounding in tort.
Although the federal government generally has sovereign immunity from lawsuits, the Tucker Act waives this immunity to allow for lawsuits for monetary damages against the federal government for all categories of claims identified in the Tucker Act.
The Tucker Act should be read with 28 U.S.C. § 1331, which vests jurisdiction to decide all questions—but not monetary damages—under the Constitution and laws of the United States in federal district courts.
This split jurisdiction means that in a taking case for just compensation, for example, must be brought in the Court of Federal Claims, an Article I court, while the challenges to the constitutional validity of a government action must be brought in a federal district, an Article III court.
The Tucker Act is the jurisdictional statute for the Court, and vests exclusive jurisdiction to hear all monetary damages claims against the United States for specific categories of claims, including claims arising under the Fifth Amendment.
What Kind of Claims Can Be Brought Under the Tucker Act?
Consistent with the Court’s Tucker Act jurisdiction to hear cases involving monetary claims against the United States, the Court hears cases involving breaches of federal contracts, tax refund suits, backpay cases brought by federal employees and members of the military, claims against the United States for patent and copyright infringement, and federal taking claims. The Court also hears claims brought by federal Indian tribes for money damages arising from the government’s breach of Indian trust responsibilities. As an Article I court, the Court also hears specific cases referred to it by Congress.
The Tucker Act Is a Jurisdictional Statute
The Tucker Act is only a jurisdictional statute. All claims brought in the Court of Federal Claims must be grounded in a money-mandating statutory or constitutional provisions. The Tucker Act creates no substantive right enforceable against the United States for money damages. The Tucker Act only identifies the categories of substantive law to identify a cognizable cause of action. The statute thus provides the right to sue to obtain a monetary remedy, while leaving the content of the legal claim to the Constitution, federal statutes, regulations, and contract law.
The Tucker Act does not provide for jurisdiction to grant equitable relief such as injunctions or for non-monetary relief, such as a mandamus or declaratory judgment.
All claims brought in the Court of Federal Claims must be grounded in a money-mandating statutory or constitutional provisions. The Tucker Act provides the right to sue to obtain a monetary remedy, while leaving the content of the legal claim to the Constitution, federal statutes, regulations, and contract law.
What Are Little Tucker Act Claims?
The United States Court of Federal Claims has exclusive jurisdiction over these Tucker Act claims exceeding $10,000. For claims of $10,000 or less, the “Little Tucker Act” allows such claims to be heard concurrently by the Court of Federal Claims and federal district courts.
Application of the Tucker Act to Current Cases and Activity
The United States Court of Federal Claims maintains a large and diverse docket of cases involving money claims against the United States. Roughly one-third of the cases involve claims brought by a party that has contracted with the federal government.
These cases may also involve related statutory claims against the federal government. Statutory claims can also be brought as separate actions. Federal and military employees seeking backpay also constitute a large number of cases pending before the Court. Taking cases form another large number of cases pending before the Court. And cases involving patent and copyright infringement are another important component of the Court’s docket.
The People’s Court
Often called the People’s Court, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims is the only federal court in the country in which a citizen can sue the United States seeking payment of money damages. In 1855, Congress created what was originally known as the United States Court of Claims (today the Court of Federal Claims).
The Federal Circuit Narrows Class Action Tolling Under the Tucker Act
The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Kelly v. United States is significant for reasons that extend well beyond its holding that the plaintiffs’...
An Interview with Daniel Gomez, New Marzulla Law Partner
Daniel E. Gomez recently joined Marzulla Law as a partner. Daniel has nearly two decades of experience as a litigator representing clients on a wide...
8 Ways Practicing Law Before the U.S. Court of Federal Claims Is Unique
Litigants experienced in particular areas of the law, but with no experience in the Court of Federal Claims (CFC), find that including local CFC...
Frozen Federal Grants Are Contract Claims Within the CFC’s Tucker Act Jurisdiction
Recently the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a significant decision in Sustainability Institute v. Trump, vacating injunctions...
Takings Law Primer
Federal Takings Law Explained: Your guide on how to protect your rights in regulatory takings and inverse condemnation actions
Contact our Legal Team to Learn More
Roger J. Marzulla is one of the nation’s leading water, property and environmental lawyers. As Assistant Attorney General in charge of the U.S. Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division, Roger learned firsthand the operations and litigation styles of his client agencies: EPA, Interior Department, Bureau of Reclamation, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Transportation, and Department of Commerce.
Nancie G. Marzulla is a founding partner of Marzulla Law, LLC. Nancie’s litigation practice concentrates on water rights, takings, and contract claims in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. She also has extensive experience in handling matters involving property, water, environmental law, Indian tribal claims, development, and natural resources in trial courts, courts of appeal, and the Supreme Court.