Department of Agriculture v. Kirtz

The USDA's erroneous submission to the credit reporting agency created the core tension the Court resolved whether an agency's false record-keeping, even without intentional wrongdoing, waives sovereign immunity under the Privacy Act's consent-to-sue provision. The Court held that the Privacy Act's waiver is broad enough to permit Kirtz to sue the federal government directly for maintaining inaccurate records (overcoming the threshold sovereign immunity bar), but that recovery of money damages still requires Kirtz to prove the USDA's violation was intentional or willful rather than merely negligent. This distinction means Kirtz's access to the courthouse was not blocked by sovereign immunity, but his entitlement to damages remained conditioned on showing the agency's conduct crossed the threshold from error to deliberate wrongdoing. The unanimous ruling thus clarified that Congress's waiver of immunity permits the suit itself while reserving the damages remedy for violations meeting a higher culpability standard.