The court rejected the appellants' claim that its case should proceed because the Supreme Court accepted "informational injuries" as a category of injury acceptable to show standing in Federal Election Comm'n v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11 (1998). The court did not have to distinguish the cases at all, because Akins was simply inapposite. In Akins, there was no question whether the underlying statutory right existed; instead, the Akins Court started from the alleged violation of a right to information under FECA and explored whether such a violation could be deemed "'sufficiently concrete and specific' to satisfy Article III." In this case, however, the court was addressing "the antecedent question whether Congress has granted a legal right" at all. Unlike FECA, the DQA does not create any individually enforceable rights at all.

Download the decision.

Posted by Robert Shull, 05:50:24 PM