Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/21-147_g31h.pdf
Page Number: 1.0

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2021 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is 
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued. 
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been 
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

EGBERT v. BOULE 

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR 
THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

No. 21–147.  Argued March 2, 2022—Decided June 8, 2022 

Respondent  Robert  Boule  owns  a  bed-and-breakfast—the  Smuggler’s 
Inn—in Blaine, Washington.  The inn abuts the international border 
between Canada and the United States.  Boule at times helped federal
agents identify and apprehend persons engaged in unlawful cross-bor-
der  activity  on  or  near  his  property.    But  Boule  also  would  provide 
transportation  and  lodging  to  illegal  border  crossers.    Often,  Boule 
would  agree  to  help  illegal  border  crossers  enter  or  exit  the  United 
States, only to later call federal agents to report the unlawful activity. 
In 2014, Boule informed petitioner Erik Egbert, a U. S. Border Pa-
trol agent, that a Turkish national, arriving in Seattle by way of New 
York, had scheduled transportation to Smuggler’s Inn.  When Agent 
Egbert observed one of Boule’s vehicles returning to the inn, he sus-
pected that the Turkish national was a passenger and followed the ve-
hicle to the inn.  On Boule’s account, Boule asked Egbert to leave, but 
Egbert refused, became violent, and threw Boule first against the ve-
hicle and then to the ground.  Egbert then checked the immigration 
paperwork for Boule’s guest and left after finding everything in order.
The Turkish guest unlawfully entered Canada later that evening. 

Boule filed a grievance with Agent Egbert’s supervisors and an ad-
ministrative  claim  with  Border  Patrol  pursuant  to  the  Federal  Tort 
Claims Act (FTCA).  Egbert allegedly retaliated against Boule by re-
porting Boule’s “SMUGLER” license plate to the Washington Depart-
ment of Licensing for referencing illegal activity, and by contacting the
Internal  Revenue  Service  and  prompting  an  audit  of  Boule’s  tax  re-
turns.  Boule’s FTCA claim was ultimately denied, and Border Patrol 
took no action against Egbert for his use of force or alleged acts of re-
taliation.  Boule then sued Egbert in Federal District Court, alleging 
a Fourth Amendment violation for excessive use of force and a First