| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | '''Administrative law standing cases''' include the following 50 precedents: | | '''Administrative law standing cases''' include the following 50 precedents: |
| − | | + | == General standing == |
| | + | *Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA, 568 U.S. 398 (2013) |
| | + | == General procedure == |
| | + | *''Ashcroft v. Iqbal'', 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (“plausibility” standard for pleadings “asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully”) |
| | + | *''Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly'', 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007) (a complaint must allege “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face”) |
| | + | == First Amendment standing == |
| | + | *''[[Blum v. Yaretsky]]'', 457 U.S. 991, 1004 (1982) (government “normally can be held responsible for a private decision only when it has exercised coercive power or has provided such significant encouragement, either overt or covert, that the choice must in law be deemed to be that of the State”) |
| | + | *Changizi v. Dep’t of Health and Hum. Servs., No. 2:22-cv-1776, 2022 WL 1423176 (S.D. Ohio May 5, 2022), ''appeal filed'', No. 2:22-cv-1776, 2022 WL 1423176 (6th Cir. June 30, 2022) |
| | + | *''[[Children’s Health Def. v. Facebook]]'', 546 F. Supp. 3d 909, 926, 930 (N.D. Cal. 2021) (“the phrase ‘vaccine misinformation’ is a general one that could encompass many different types of speech and information about vaccines,” and thus the “general statements” by Congressman Schiff and the CDC concerning “vaccine misinformation” did not “mandate[] the particular actions that Facebook took with regard to [the plaintiff’s] Facebook page”) |
| | + | *''Hart v. Facebook'', No. 22-cv-00737, 2022 WL 1427507 (N.D. Cal. May 5, 2022) (content moderation measures by Twitter and Facebook had “no causal relationship with the Federal Defendants’ actions, and no court order as to the Federal Defendants could redress it”) |
| | + | == Other == |
| | *Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737 (1984) | | *Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737 (1984) |
| | *Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc., 568 U.S. 85 (2013) | | *Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc., 568 U.S. 85 (2013) |
| | *Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. v. Sullivan, 526 U.S. 40 (1999) | | *Am. Mfrs. Mut. Ins. v. Sullivan, 526 U.S. 40 (1999) |
| − | *''Ashcroft v. Iqbal'', 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (“plausibility” standard for pleadings “asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully”)
| |
| | *Ass’n of Am. Physicians & Surgeons v. Schiff, 518 F. Supp. 3d 505 (D.D.C. 2021) | | *Ass’n of Am. Physicians & Surgeons v. Schiff, 518 F. Supp. 3d 505 (D.D.C. 2021) |
| | *Ass’n of Am. Physicians & Surgeons v. Schiff, 23 F.4th 1028 (D.C. Cir. 2022) | | *Ass’n of Am. Physicians & Surgeons v. Schiff, 23 F.4th 1028 (D.C. Cir. 2022) |
| | *''Barnes v. Lehman'', 861 F.2d 1383, 1387 (5th Cir. 1988) (regulations “do not convert private action into state action” even when the regulation “dictate[s] procedures, forms, or even penalties without dictating the challenged action”) | | *''Barnes v. Lehman'', 861 F.2d 1383, 1387 (5th Cir. 1988) (regulations “do not convert private action into state action” even when the regulation “dictate[s] procedures, forms, or even penalties without dictating the challenged action”) |
| − | *''Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly'', 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007) (a complaint must allege “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face”)
| |
| − | *''[[Blum v. Yaretsky]]'', 457 U.S. 991, 1004 (1982) (government “normally can be held responsible for a private decision only when it has exercised coercive power or has provided such significant encouragement, either overt or covert, that the choice must in law be deemed to be that of the State”)
| |
| | *Cargill, Inc. v. United States, 173 F.3d 323 (5th Cir. 1999) | | *Cargill, Inc. v. United States, 173 F.3d 323 (5th Cir. 1999) |
| − | *Changizi v. Dep’t of Health and Hum. Servs., No. 2:22-cv-1776, 2022 WL 1423176 (S.D. Ohio May 5, 2022), ''appeal filed'', No. 2:22-cv-1776, 2022 WL 1423176 (6th Cir. June 30, 2022)
| |
| − | *''[[Children’s Health Def. v. Facebook]]'', 546 F. Supp. 3d 909, 926, 930 (N.D. Cal. 2021) (“the phrase ‘vaccine misinformation’ is a general one that could encompass many different types of speech and information about vaccines,” and thus the “general statements” by Congressman Schiff and the CDC concerning “vaccine misinformation” did not “mandate[] the particular actions that Facebook took with regard to [the plaintiff’s] Facebook page”)
| |
| − | *Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA, 568 U.S. 398 (2013)
| |
| | *Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Tidwell, 239 F. Supp. 3d 213 (D.D.C. 2017) | | *Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Tidwell, 239 F. Supp. 3d 213 (D.D.C. 2017) |
| | *Eccles v. Peoples Bank of Lakewood Village, Cal., 333 U.S. 426 (1948) | | *Eccles v. Peoples Bank of Lakewood Village, Cal., 333 U.S. 426 (1948) |
| Line 19: |
Line 23: |
| | *Empower Texans, Inc. v. Geren, 977 F.3d 367 (5th Cir. 2020) | | *Empower Texans, Inc. v. Geren, 977 F.3d 367 (5th Cir. 2020) |
| | *Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw Env’t Servs. (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (2000) | | *Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw Env’t Servs. (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (2000) |
| − | *''Hart v. Facebook'', No. 22-cv-00737, 2022 WL 1427507 (N.D. Cal. May 5, 2022) (content moderation measures by Twitter and Facebook had “no causal relationship with the Federal Defendants’ actions, and no court order as to the Federal Defendants could redress it”)
| |
| | *''Honig v. Doe'', 484 U.S. 305, 317 (1988) (limits federal adjudication to “actual, ongoing controversies”) | | *''Honig v. Doe'', 484 U.S. 305, 317 (1988) (limits federal adjudication to “actual, ongoing controversies”) |
| | *Hooks v. Landmark Indus., 797 F.3d 309 (5th Cir. 2015) | | *Hooks v. Landmark Indus., 797 F.3d 309 (5th Cir. 2015) |