The Supreme Court announced Monday it would hear a dispute over FBI liability in a raid its agents conducted at the wrong home.

The challenge concerns the Federal Torts Claims Act, which allows Americans to sue government officials.

An Atlanta family took the federal government to court in an attempt to recover some of the damage caused by agents who threw a flashbang grenade into their living room and woke them up one morning in October 2017 with guns drawn.

After questioning one of the adults, the agents realized they had raided the wrong address. According to court filings, the agents were in the home for about five minutes.

An agent left the family with information to contact the team’s supervisor, but now nearly eight years later, the family has still not been reimbursed for the trauma caused by the incident. The agent blamed his personal GPS device, saying it had diverted his team to the wrong house.

The 11th U.S. Court of Appeals ruled against the family, composed of mother Trina Martin; son Gabe, who was 7 years old at the time; and Ms. Martin’s partner, Toi Cliatt.

The appeals court reasoned the agent was acting within his law enforcement scope and did not violate the Fourth Amendment.

“What happened to us was deeply unjust, and I’m relieved that the Supreme Court is taking up our fight for justice and accountability,” Ms. Martin said. “Congress wanted people in our unfortunate position to have the right to sue. When the government harms innocent people, it has a responsibility to make things right.”

It took four justices to vote in favor of hearing the case, Curtrina Martin v. United States.

“When police — including the FBI — raid the wrong house, they must be held responsible for the damages,” said Anya Bidwell, a senior attorney with the Institute for Justice, representing Ms. Martin. “The 11th Circuit let the government off the hook in this case, and we are hopeful that the Supreme Court will do the right thing and ensure that Americans can feel secure in their own homes.”

The federal government had urged the court not to take up the case.

“The court correctly held that petitioners’ claims are barred, and no court of appeals to have addressed the issue would have reached a different result,” wrote former Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, who represented the federal government during the Biden administration.

A date for oral arguments has not yet been set.

• Alex Swoyer can be reached at aswoyer@washingtontimes.com.