Munns v. Kerry, No. 12-15969 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePlaintiffs, the family members and a former coworker of three Americans who were kidnapped and killed while providing contract security services during the U.S. military occupation of Iraq, brought suit against U.S. government officials challenging policies governing the supervision of private contractors and the response to the kidnappings of American citizens in Iraq (“policy claims”) and claiming that the government was withholding back pay, insurance proceeds, and government benefits owed to the families of the deceased contractors (“monetary claims”). The district court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims. The Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part, holding that the district court (1) correctly dismissed the policy claims for lack of standing and for presenting nonjusticiable political questions; but (2) erred in dismissing the monetary claims for failure to establish a waiver of the government’s sovereign immunity from suits for damages and for failure to state a claim, as, although Plaintiffs failed to allege a governmental waiver of sovereign immunity that would confer jurisdiction in the district court over the monetary claims, the United States Court of Federal Claims had jurisdiction over the claims for withheld back pay and insurance proceeds. Remanded for the district court to transfer those claims.
Court Description: Standing / Jurisdiction. The panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ equitable claims due to lack of standing and their federal benefits claims due to lack of jurisdiction, and vacated the district court’s dismissal of the due process and takings claims for withheld back pay and insurance proceeds in an action brought against United States government officials by family members and a coworker of three Americans who were kidnapped and killed while providing contract security services during the United States military occupation of Iraq. The panel held that the plaintiffs had not shown that they were likely to be harmed in the future by the United States’ policies governing the supervision of private contractors and the response to kidnappings of American citizens in Iraq; and therefore, the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to seek prospective declaratory and injunctive relief regarding those policies. The panel also held that the plaintiffs failed to allege a governmental waiver of sovereign immunity that would confer jurisdiction in the district court over their MUNNS V. KERRY 3 monetary claims. Finally, the panel held that the United States Court of Federal Claims had jurisdiction over the plaintiffs’ claims for withheld back pay and insurance proceeds, and directed the district court to sever and transfer those claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1631. Judge Reinhardt concurred, and wrote separately to emphasize that it would not be appropriate for the court to resolve in this case any questions regarding the proper policies for the government to follow with respect to the role of contractors in Iraq, nor determine how the government, or the families of hostages, should deal with terrorist groups who hold hostage United States citizens.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.