Read on Twitter
“Good luck” & “hope” will not be enough to overcome 20+ years of conservative courts weakening the Privacy Act damages provision that may doom success of Carter Page’s suit.
Does even one Republican in Congress support reform to make the Privacy Act workable? https://twitter.com/arifleischer/status/1332688665898835971
Does even one Republican in Congress support reform to make the Privacy Act workable? https://twitter.com/arifleischer/status/1332688665898835971
The same can be said about the prospect of success for Carter Page’s Bivens damages claims. Conservative SCOTUS justices who are the heroes of the Federalist Society crowd really dislike Bivens cases. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/committees/civil-rights/practice/2020/scotus-sharply-limits-bivens-claims-and-hints-at-further-retrenchment/
I’m not an expert on the FISA civil liability provision & not sure if any such case has been filed under that statute let alone succeeded. However, the DOJ OIG’s finding that the FISA warrant was legitimately opened would appear to make that a difficult claim.
For those hoping Carter Page’s lawsuit will bankrupt James Comey & Andrew McCabe, think again. Odds are likely that the DOJ will certify under Westfall Act the individual defendants were acting in their official capacity & the United States will be substituted as the defendant.
As for the Federal Torts Claim Act, what’s the tort Carter Page is alleging? FTCA claims are based on analogous state law tort claims & Page will likely have to show there’s a viable tort claim under D.C. law. “Good luck” with that.
If any of these claims survive the motion to dismiss stage, Carter Page will have a steep 
to establish liability given findings that the FISA investigation was legitimately opened despite errors, omissions & misconduct that invalidated 2 of the 4 FISA warrants.
to establish liability given findings that the FISA investigation was legitimately opened despite errors, omissions & misconduct that invalidated 2 of the 4 FISA warrants.
That is not to say that Carter Page has no chance of succeeding on any his claims, but the result will be much narrower liability if any can be established at all & damages far more modest if there’s any claim that is permitted to go forward.
For example, after we sued the Defense Department & those involved in the leak of information from Linda Tripp’s security clearance file the DOD IG found that the leak violated the Privacy Act. However, all claims against the individuals responsible for the leak were dismissed.
With an OIG finding that there was a Privacy Act violation when DOD leaked information from Linda Tripp’s file, we were able to obtain a $595,000 settlement. https://kkc.com/news/usa-today-defense-department-settles-with-linda-tripp/
Prior to the Linda Tripp Privacy Act case @KKCWhistleblow sued the FBI & DOJ & on behalf of Dr. Frederic Whitehurst, the FBI Lab #whistleblower, and obtained settlements under the Privacy Act amounting to about $1.4 million in 1998. 
https://kkc.com/whistleblower-case-archive/frederic-whitehurst/
https://kkc.com/whistleblower-case-archive/frederic-whitehurst/
Both the Whitehurst & Tripp Privacy Act settlements happened before SCOTUS significantly narrowed the Privacy Act damages provision in 2 cases. Carter Page has the bad luck of suing after conservative SCOTUS rulings eviscerated Privacy Act damages claims. https://kkc.com/news/actual-damages-chameleon-like-definition-means-no-emotional-damages-in-privacy-act/
Carter Page doesn’t allege that any of the named defendants were convicted under 50 USC § 1809, which seems to be a requirement to bring a case under 50 USC § 1810. If that’s the case his FISA civil liability cause of action will be dismissed for failing to state a claim.
On the Bivens claims, or any of the claims that might be allowed to proceed against individual defendants in their personal capacities, there will be complex briefing on the issue of qualified immunity. See, Harlow v. Fitzgerald.
The DOJ OIG report on the FBI FISA investigation is critical of FBI failure to follow policies and OIG recommended improved policies, but Carter Page will need to show how defendants’ conduct violated “clearly established precedent” to overcome the qualified immunity defense.
Maybe Carter Page can clear the qualified immunity hurdle against some defendants (like Lisa Page, Strzok & Clinesmith), but hard to imagine a court would find all of these FBI officials, including the FBI Director, violated “clearly established” law to be held personally liable.
But Carter Page will need to demonstrate to the court specifically what clearly established rights were knowingly violated by each of these defendants. Just arguing that defendants violated Fourth Amendment or statutory privacy rights in general won’t overcome qualified immunity.
