The 'CORRUPT Act' Blocks the President and Family from Suing the Government Under the Federal Tort Claims Act

If you’re like most people, you probably haven’t spent much time thinking about the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). But it’s the law that lets regular citizens sue the U.S. government if, say, a federal employee causes an accident or damages your property. It’s a key piece of accountability. Now, a proposed bill, officially titled the Ceasing Outrageous Restitution and Reimbursement Under President Trump Act, or the CORRUPT Act, wants to carve out a very specific exception: it would bar the sitting President and their immediate family from using the FTCA while the President is in office. This isn’t just a procedural tweak; it’s a direct restriction on the legal rights of the executive family, even if they have a legitimate claim.

Who Gets Cut Out?

This bill amends Section 2680 of title 28 of the U.S. Code to add a new subsection (o) that simply says no claim can be filed under the FTCA by the President or a “covered relative” while the President is serving. The term “covered relative” is broad, encompassing the President’s spouse, children, siblings, and in-laws. Think about that scope: if the President’s brother-in-law had his car totaled by a careless postal worker, he would be blocked from seeking compensation through the FTCA—the standard legal route for everyone else—simply because of his familial connection to the Oval Office.

The Real-World Impact of Being Blocked

The FTCA exists because you can’t sue the government unless they say you can. This law is the government saying, “Okay, if we mess up, here’s the process for you to seek damages.” By blocking the President and covered relatives from using it, the bill effectively denies them this specific avenue of legal recourse during the term of office. For the President, this might be viewed as a necessary check to prevent potential conflicts of interest or frivolous lawsuits against the government they lead. But for the siblings or in-laws, who are otherwise private citizens, it means they lose a standard legal right that the rest of us retain. They would be left without the primary mechanism for holding federal agencies accountable for negligence.

More Than Just Procedure: The Title Problem

While the substance of the bill is about legal procedure, the title itself—the CORRUPT Act—is anything but neutral. It’s highly inflammatory language that suggests the legislative intent is driven by political motivation rather than purely administrative concern. This kind of titling is a red flag for anyone trying to understand policy: it frames a legal change in deeply partisan terms right out of the gate. While the bill’s effect is clearly defined (no FTCA claims for the executive family), the aggressive naming signals that this legislation is less about making good law and more about making a political statement. For busy people, this is a reminder that you always have to look past the headline and dig into the actual text to see what the law is doing versus what the title says.