ESTHER HUI, et al., Petitioners v. YANIRA CASTANEDA, as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF FRANCISCO CASTANEDA, et al., 559 U.S. 799

Summary

By its terms, § 233(a) limited recovery for petitioners' conduct to suits against the United States. Section 233(a) referred only to the remedy against the United States provided by 28 U.S.C.S. §§ 1346(b), 2672, of the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). If § 233(a)'s reference to § 1346(b) served to incorporate all the provisions of the FTCA, the separate reference to § 2672 would have been superfluous. 28 U.S.C.S. § 2679(b) was not incorporated, and § 2679(b)(2)(A)'s application only to the specific immunity set forth in § 2679(b)(1) belied the claim that the Westfall Act's Bivens exception, § 2679(b)(2)(A), directly preserved a Bivens action against petitioners. There was no reason to think that scope certification under § 2679(d)(1) was a prerequisite to immunity under § 233(a). Such certification was not necessary to effect substitution of the United States in § 233(a) cases. Nor was § 233(f)'s authorization of insurance or indemnification in certain circumstances availing because an ...