Case Detail

Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins
On May 16, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed a Ninth Circuit decision that would have allowed uninjured class-action plaintiffs to sue in federal court for bare, technical violations of federal law. In a 6-2 decision, the Court held that although the Ninth Circuit correctly concluded that Thomas Robins, the named plaintiff in the case, had suffered a particularized injury, the appeals court had overlooked the additional requirement that the injury be “concrete.” After elaborating at length on the injury-in-fact requirement for standing to sue in federal court, the Court vacated the Ninth Circuit’s opinion and remanded the case directing the appeals court to determine whether the injury alleged by Robins was sufficiently concrete. The decision was a victory for WLF, which filed a brief in the case arguing that Article III of the Constitution bars federal courts from hearing claims brought by plaintiffs who suffered no concrete harm from alleged statutory violations.
Case Status:
More Information and Downloads:
7/9/2015: Download the Brief
Press Release: WLF Asks Supreme Court to Bar Uninjured-Plaintiff Lawsuits
Press Release: Supreme Court Will Hear Oral Argument on Monday: Does U.S. Constitution Prohibit Uninjured-Plaintiff Lawsuits?
Press Release: In WLF Victory, High Court Insists that Plaintiffs Must Allege a Concrete Injury to Bring Federal Lawsuit
  • Welcome to the Washington Legal Foundation
  • 2009 Massachusetts Ave., NW
    Washington, DC 20036
  • info@wlf.org  |  ph. 202-588-0302
    ©2017 WLF All Rights Reserved