WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court on Monday ruled against a Wyoming rancher who sued government employees in a dispute over federal access to a road on his land.

Harvey Frank Robbins of Hot Springs County accused half a dozen employees in the Bureau of Land Management of trying to coerce him into granting an easement on a road leading to the Shoshone National Forest.

In a 7-2 ruling, the court said that Robbins could not sue under the Fifth Amendment.

The case is important to the government because it could have exposed individual federal workers to personal liability. The suit is significant in the West, where huge tracts are intermingled among government and private owners, requiring frequent negotiations for reciprocal access.

Robbins alleged the federal employees violated a Fifth Amendment right to exclude others from his property. Robbins relied on a 1971 Supreme Court decision allowing damage remedies for constitutional violations by federal agents.

Robbins said there should be a constitutional avenue for private citizens to sue government employees for continued harassment, instead of having to sue for individual retaliatory actions.

The Fifth Amendment requires just compensation when the government takes property. The Robbins case dealt with what rights an owner has when the government stops short of actually taking property.

Bringing such an action "would invite claims in every sphere of legitimate governmental action affecting property interests, from negotiating tax claim settlements to enforcing Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations," wrote Justice David Souter.

Two justices said Robbins should have been allowed to proceed with his lawsuit.

"The record is replete with accounts of trespasses to Robbins' property, vindictive cancelations of his rights to access federal land and unjustified or selective enforcement actions," Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote in dissent. The agency for which the federal employees worked conducted a "seven-year campaign of harassment" that "had a devastating impact on Robbins' business." Justice John Paul Stevens joined Ginsburg's dissent.

Robbins also sued under the racketeering law, accusing the government employees of trying to extort an easement from him. The vote on that portion of the case was 9-0 against Robbins. The conduct the rancher alleges does not fit the traditional definition of extortion, so his complaint under the racketeering law cannot survive, the court said.

Robbins owns a working cattle ranch and guest ranch offering cattle drives and big game hunting. He says the government employees trespassed on his property and canceled his right of way across federal lands, resulting in the destruction of his business. He was charged with interfering with the work of federal officers. A jury acquitted him. The government canceled Robbins' special recreational use permit, saying he had repeatedly failed to comply with its terms.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had said the federal employees did not have immunity from the Fifth Amendment claim or the allegations under the racketeering law.

The government said it was concerned about a chilling effect on government employees doing their jobs because they face personal liability.

The case is Wilkie v. Robbins, 06-219.