In Kumar v. Koester, No. 23-4363 (9th Cir. Mar. 12, 2025), the Ninth Circuit dismisses a constitutional challenge to California State University’s anti-discrimination policy that was recently amended to add “caste” as a protected status. Effective January 1, 2022, CSU’s “Policy Prohibiting Discrimination, Harassment, Sexual Misconduct, Sexual Exploitation, Dating Violence, Domestic Violence, Stalking, and RetaliationContinue reading “Hindu Professors at State University Lacked Article III Standing to Challenge School’s “Caste” Discrimination Policy, Holds Ninth Circuit”
Tag Archives: Injury
Sixth Circuit Addresses Tension in Supreme Court Legislator-Standing Authority
In Lindsey v. Whitmer, No. 24-1413 (6th Cir. Dec. 20, 2024), the Sixth Circuit struggled to reconcile two lines of Supreme Court authority about the standing of state legislators to bring federal-court lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of a state law. “The Michigan Constitution . . . . empowers citizens to amend the state constitution directlyContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Addresses Tension in Supreme Court Legislator-Standing Authority”
Loss of Per Diem Payments Was Not Enough to Secure Article III Standing for Commissioners Fighting Reorganization of an Airport Authority, Holds the Fifth Circuit (in the Fourth Appeal of the Case)
While monetary loss is almost always deemed sufficient to trigger Article III standing, in Jones v. Reeves, No. 24-60371 (5th Cir. Nov. 19, 2024), a Fifth Circuit panel dismisses an eight-year old case (on its fourth appeal) on the ground that the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing to protect per diem payments they recieved byContinue reading “Loss of Per Diem Payments Was Not Enough to Secure Article III Standing for Commissioners Fighting Reorganization of an Airport Authority, Holds the Fifth Circuit (in the Fourth Appeal of the Case)”
Never Say Die: D.C. Circuit Holds That Plaintiff Preserved Standing Argument by Raising It for the First Time in a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) Motion After District Court’s Dismissal
In Tanner-Brown v. Haaland, No. 22-5302 (D.C. Cir. June 25, 2024), the D.C. Circuit reverses dismissal on Article III standing grounds of an action against the U.S. Department of Interior for an accounting, based on an argument only first raised by plaintiff after dismissal in a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to reconsider. “AppellantContinue reading “Never Say Die: D.C. Circuit Holds That Plaintiff Preserved Standing Argument by Raising It for the First Time in a Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) Motion After District Court’s Dismissal”
Risk Posed by Contaminated Baby Formula Alone Was Not Enough to Constitute Concrete Injury for Article III Standing, Holds Seventh Circuit
In Economic Loss Plaintiffs v. Abbott Laboratories, No. 23-2525 (7th Cir. Apr. 2, 2024), the Seventh Circuit holds that “a potential class of consumers who purchased infant formula manufactured by Abbott Laboratories at a facility later deemed unsanitary” failed to establish Article III standing based on “potential risk of injury.” “Abbott Laboratories produces powdered infantContinue reading “Risk Posed by Contaminated Baby Formula Alone Was Not Enough to Constitute Concrete Injury for Article III Standing, Holds Seventh Circuit”
Split Second Circuit Panel Holds That an Organization Must Identify At Least One Affected Member by Name to Qualify for Article III Associational Standing
In Do No Harm v. Pfizer, Inc., No. 23-15_(2d Cir. Mar. 6, 2024), a 2-1 panel of the Second Circuit holds that “an association must identify by name at least one injured member for purposes of establishing Article III standing under a summary judgment standard.” “Do No Harm, a nationwide membership organization, filed suit againstContinue reading “Split Second Circuit Panel Holds That an Organization Must Identify At Least One Affected Member by Name to Qualify for Article III Associational Standing”
Seventh Circuit Holds That Even a Brief Interruption of Self-Employment Can Be An Injury For Article III Purposes, But It Must Be Proven Factually
In Brown v. CACH, Inc., No. 23-1308 (7th Cir. Feb. 29, 2024), the Seventh Circuit observes that a self-employed person may argue, as an Article III injury, that they were interrupted from remunerative work – even briefly – but that the injury must be proven, not assumed. In response to a call at home aboutContinue reading “Seventh Circuit Holds That Even a Brief Interruption of Self-Employment Can Be An Injury For Article III Purposes, But It Must Be Proven Factually”
Seventh Circuit Holds That Lawyer Has No Article III Standing to Appeal Court Order Revoking His Pro Hac Vice Admission Where Case Below Is Settled and Dismissed with Prejudice
In Bailey v. Worthington Cylinder Corp., No. 22-2111 (7th Cir. Jan. 22, 2024), the Seventh Circuit dismisses an out-of-state lawyer’s appeal of a lower order revoking his pro hac vice admission, holding that his reputational interest alone does not present a redressable interest to support Article III standing. Appellant counsel “is an attorney licensed toContinue reading “Seventh Circuit Holds That Lawyer Has No Article III Standing to Appeal Court Order Revoking His Pro Hac Vice Admission Where Case Below Is Settled and Dismissed with Prejudice”
Unanimous En Banc Second Circuit Holds That Female High-School Athletes Have Article III Standing to Challenge Inclusion of Transgender Girls in Competition Under Title IX, But Fracture Over How Such a Claim May Be Redressable
In Soule ex rel. Stanescu v. Connecticut Assoc. of Schools, Inc., No. 21-1365 (2d Cir. Dec. 15, 2023) (en banc), a rare full-court opinion by the Second Circuit, fifteen judges (thirteen active and two senior) concur that there is Article III standing for four female high-school athletes who alleged they are aggrieved by competition withContinue reading “Unanimous En Banc Second Circuit Holds That Female High-School Athletes Have Article III Standing to Challenge Inclusion of Transgender Girls in Competition Under Title IX, But Fracture Over How Such a Claim May Be Redressable”
Third Circuit Panel Splits Three Ways on Whether and How FDCPA Plaintiff Had Article III Standing Based on Ambiguous Balance Statement
In Huber v. Simons Agency Inc., No. 22-2483 (3d Cir. Oct. 12, 2023), each judge on the panel arrived at a different outcome about whether a plaintiff under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692– 1692p, suffered an Article III injury because of receiving a debt-collection letter that arguably overstated theirContinue reading “Third Circuit Panel Splits Three Ways on Whether and How FDCPA Plaintiff Had Article III Standing Based on Ambiguous Balance Statement”
Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog 