the United States is immune from suit without its consent.” Muirhead v. Mecham, 427 F.3d 14, 17 (1st Cir.2005). This includes agencies of the Federal government. See F.D.I.C. v. Meyer, 510 U.S. 471, 114 S.Ct. 996, 127 L.Ed.2d 308 (1994)(barring suit against a Federal agency based on the sovereign immunity doctrine). Consent to be sued has to be expressly waived by the Federal government. In other words, it cannot be implied. United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1, 4, 89 S.Ct. 1501, 23 L.Ed.2d 52 (1969). Such immunity shields the Federal government and its agencies from suit unless it is expressly waived. Id. at 474. In light of Bivens, the application of blanket immunity to federal officials has been more limited. See Butz v. Economou, 438 U.S. 478, 98 S.Ct. 2894, 57 L.Ed.2d 895 (1978) (<HOLDING>). Federal officials, in the performance of
holding that federal executive officials in general are not privileged with absolute immunity recognizing that absolute immunity is immunity from charges of either constitutional or statutory violations holding that the considerations underlying absolute prosecutorial immunity at common law dictate the same absolute immunity under  1983 holding that officials charged with the duty of executing a facially valid court order enjoy absolute immunity holding that prosecutors have absolute immunity