In Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA, No. 20-1191 (4th Cir. Sept. 16, 2021), a three-way split panel holds 2-1 that Wikimedia has Article III standing to challenge National Security Agency’s (NSA) domestic surveillance of transmission lines, but a different 2-1 majority holds that the case fails because of the “state secret doctrine.” The Fourth Circuit hadContinue reading “Website Has Standing but Fails to Overcome State Secret Doctrine in Challenge to NSA “Upstream” Surveillance Program, Holds Splintered Fourth Circuit Panel”
Tag Archives: Standing
Fifth Circuit Holds That Busker Has Standing to File Pre-Enforcement First Amendment Challenge to Ban on Musical Performances for Money in Public Places
In Barilla v. City of Houston, No. 20-20535 (5th Cir. Sept. 10, 2021), a Fifth Circuit panel reverses dismissal on standing grounds of a First Amendment challenge to Houston’s ordinance clamping down on “bands, musicians, singers, mimes, and other artists who perform for gratuities on the sidewalk.” “Barilla challenges three City ordinances (collectively, the ‘BuskingContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Holds That Busker Has Standing to File Pre-Enforcement First Amendment Challenge to Ban on Musical Performances for Money in Public Places”
Tenth Circuit Holds That a Single Phone Call That the Debtor Didn’t Even Answer Created Standing Under the FDCPA, Breaking with the Seventh Circuit
In a blog entry dated December 16, 2020, I summarized five decisions by the Seventh Circuit that dramatically crimped Article III standing in Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) cases. In yesterday’s decision, Lupia v. Medicredit, No. 20-1294 (10th Cir. Aug. 17, 2021), the Tenth Circuit expressly rejects the Seventh Circuit’s approach and holds thatContinue reading “Tenth Circuit Holds That a Single Phone Call That the Debtor Didn’t Even Answer Created Standing Under the FDCPA, Breaking with the Seventh Circuit”
Plaintiffs Lack Standing in Suit to Order National Archivist to Publish Equal Rights Amendment, Holds First Circuit
In Equal Means Equal v. Ferriero, No. 20-1802 (1st Cir. June 29, 2021), the First Circuit holds that two orgnaizations and an individual citizen lacked an “injury” for standing in a lawsuit to order the National Archives to record the Equal Rights Amendment as “the duly ratified 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.” “The plaintiffsContinue reading “Plaintiffs Lack Standing in Suit to Order National Archivist to Publish Equal Rights Amendment, Holds First Circuit”
Suit by Heir Over Deceased Parent’s Investment Does Not Fall Under Probate Exception to Diversity, Holds Eleventh Circuit
In Fisher v. PNC Bank, N.A., No. 20-10110 (11th Cir. June 29, 2021), the Eleventh Circuit reverses dismissal of a state-law conversion and fraud action, finding that there is diversity jurisdiction and standing. The panel rejects the bank’s argument that the claim, concerning a joint account with an accountholder who died, falls within the probateContinue reading “Suit by Heir Over Deceased Parent’s Investment Does Not Fall Under Probate Exception to Diversity, Holds Eleventh Circuit”
Fifth Circuit Splits with Eleventh, Holds That Receipt of a Single Robotext in Violation of TCPA Creates Article III Standing
In Cranor v. 5 Star Nutrition, No. 19-51173 (5th Cir. May 26, 2021), the panel holds that even a single robotext in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (“TCPA”) is analogous to a common-law public nuisance, and thus an injury to confers Article III standing. 5 Star Nutrition, an Austin-based nutritional supplementContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Splits with Eleventh, Holds That Receipt of a Single Robotext in Violation of TCPA Creates Article III Standing”
Two Judges of the Seventh Circuit Say That They, Too, Are Getting Fed Up with Spokeo and Standing
A couple of weeks ago, Judge Newsom of the Eleventh Circuit made a splash with a long, scholarly concurring opinion suggesting a complete refurbishing of standing doctrine. (See May 6, 2021 entry.) Last Friday, in Markakos v. Medicredit, Inc., No. 20-2350 (7th Cir. May 14, 2021), two more judges of the Seventh Circuit express theirContinue reading “Two Judges of the Seventh Circuit Say That They, Too, Are Getting Fed Up with Spokeo and Standing”
Second Circuit Holds That State Statutory Law Can Create Legally Protected Interests That Support Article III Standing
In Maddox v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon Tr. Co., No. 19-1774 (2d Cir. May 10, 2021), a split panel holds that statutory damages under New York’s mortgage-satisfaction-recording statutes support Article III standing. New York’s mortgage-satisfaction-recording statutes, N.Y. Real P. Law (“R.P.L.”) § 275, N.Y. Real P. Actions & Proc. L. (“R.P.A.P.L.”) § 1921, provides anContinue reading “Second Circuit Holds That State Statutory Law Can Create Legally Protected Interests That Support Article III Standing”
Eleventh Circuit Holds Deaf User of City Website Had Standing to Sue, While Concurring Opinion Urges Complete Overhaul of Injury-in-Fact Inquiry for Article III Standing
In Sierra v. City of Hallandale Beach Fla., No. 19-13694 (11th Cir. May 6, 2021), the panel holds that a deaf visitor to a municipal website had standing to challenge the lack of closed captioning on the videos. Judge Newsom, in a 57-page separate opinion, expresses “doubt that current standing doctrine—and especially its injury-in-fact requirement—isContinue reading “Eleventh Circuit Holds Deaf User of City Website Had Standing to Sue, While Concurring Opinion Urges Complete Overhaul of Injury-in-Fact Inquiry for Article III Standing”
Second Circuit Holds That the Costs of “Proactive Measures” to Avoid Identity Theft Is Not an Actual Injury for Title III Purposes
In McMorris v. Carlos Lopez & Assocs., LLC, No. 19-4310 (2d Cir. Apr. 27, 2021), the Second Circuit holds that state-law claims for an intraoffice data leak may constitute an “actual injury” for Article III standing purposes, though in this case plaintiffs factually failed to allege an injury for taking “proactive measures.” Defendant CLA “providesContinue reading “Second Circuit Holds That the Costs of “Proactive Measures” to Avoid Identity Theft Is Not an Actual Injury for Title III Purposes”
Paul Mollica's Federal Courts Blog 