United States, Petitioner v. James X. Bormes (568 U.S. 6)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided November 13, 2012 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 568 U.S. 6 · 133 S. Ct. 12
- Decided
- November 13, 2012
- Term
- October Term 2012
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Scalia
- Issue area
- Privacy
- Disposition
- Vacated and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court. The Little Tucker Act, 28 U. S. C. § 1346(a)(2), provides that “[t]he district courts shall have original jurisdiction, concurrent with the United States Court of Federal Claims, of... [a]ny ... civil action or claim against the United States, not exceeding $10,000 in amount, founded . . . upon . . . any Act of Congress.” We consider whether the Little Tucker Act waives the sovereign immunity of the United States with respect to damages actions for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA or Act), 15 U. S. C. § 1681 et sea. I—I FCRA has as one of its purposes to “protect consumer privacy.” Safeco Ins. Co. of America v. Burr, 551 U. S. 47, 52 (2007); see 84 Stat. 1128, 15 U. S. C. § 1681. To that end, FCRA provides, among other things, that “no person that accepts credit cards or debit cards for the transaction of business shall print more than the last 5 digits of the card number or the expiration date upon any receipt provided to the cardholder at the point of the sale or transaction.” § 1681c(g)(l) (emphasis added). The Act defines “person” as “any individual, partnership, corporation, trust, estate, cooperative, association, government or governmental subdivision or agency, or other entity.” § 1681a(b). FCRA imposes civil liability for willful or negligent noncompliance with its requirements: “Any person who…
Excerpt of a 19,349-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.