Subject matter jurisdiction cases include the following:
- United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625, 630 (2002) ("[S]ubject-matter jurisdiction, because it involves a court's power to hear a case, can never be forfeited or waived.").
- “Moreover, courts, including this Court, have an independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists, even in the absence of a challenge from any party.” Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006) (citing Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574, 583 (1999)).
- In re Marriage of Truax, 522 N.E.2d 402, 405 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988) ("A judgment entered by a court that lacks subject matter jurisdiction is void and may be attacked at any time. Id. at 1027. Because we find that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to order termination of child support due to interference with visitation in 1977, Cole's jurisdictional challenge was timely when raised for the first time in 1985.")
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83 (1998)
Additional cases
Mootness
Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc., 568 U.S. 85 (2013) (must be a live controversy “through all stages of the litigation”)
Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, 141 S. Ct. 792 (2021) (must be a “a personal interest in the dispute ... throughout the proceedings”)
New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. City of New York, 140 S. Ct. 1525 (2020) (per curiam) (standing ceases when an interest ceases to exist when a plaintiff has received “the precise relief ... requested in the prayer for relief in [its] complaint.”)
Amawi v. Paxton, 956 F.3d 816 (5th Cir. 2020) (finding mootness when a legislative amendment “provided the plaintiffs the very relief their lawsuit sought”)
Shemwell v. City of McKinney, 63 F.4th 480 (5th Cir. 2023) ((holding that a request for prospective declaratory relief does not prevent mootness if the plaintiff “no longer faced an actual or imminent injury that could be prospectively declared”)
Voluntary cessation
A presumption is given to the government when it ceases a program.
Freedom from Religion Found., Inc. v. Abbott, 58 F.4th 824 (5th Cir. 2023)
Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (2000)
Sossamon v. Texas, 560 F.3d 316 (5th Cir. 2009), aff’d, 563 U.S. 277 (2011)
U.S. Navy SEALs 1-26 v. Biden, 72 F.4th 666 (5th Cir. 2023) (“the government’s mere ‘ability to reimplement the statute or regulation at issue is insufficient to prove the voluntary-cessation exception.’”)
FACA-type cases
Campaign Legal Ctr. v. Scott, 49 F.4th 931 (5th Cir. 2022) (holding that “in public disclosure-based cases, plaintiffs must and can assert ‘downstream consequences,’ which is another way of identifying concrete harm from governmental failures to disclose,” in order to establish standing)
Other
Electronic Privacy Info. Ctr. v. Drone Advisory Comm., 995 F.3d 993 (D.C. Cir. 2021)
Greiner v. United States, 900 F.3d 700 (5th Cir. 2018)
Marucci Sports, LLC v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass’n, 751 F.3d 368 (5th Cir. 2014)
Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (2006)
California v. Texas, 141 S. Ct. 2104 (2021)
United States ex rel. Spicer v. Westbrook, 751 F.3d 354 (5th Cir. 2014)