An upcoming Supreme Court case on Article III standing and disability presents critical questions about the future of litigation that promotes societal change. In Acheson Hotels v. Laufer, scheduled for the 2023 Term, the Court confronts the issue of whether a plaintiff with disabilities has standing to challenge a hotel’s failure to provide accessibility information when the plaintiff lacks concrete plans to visit the hotel. The case raises doctrinal quandaries because it sits atop a fault line between two models of litigation: a “public law” model that permits plaintiffs, often backed by interest groups, to use litigation to advance public aims; and a “private right” model that treats as the default mode of litigation a suit by A against B in tort, property, or contract. This Essay unravels the doctrinal and conceptual threads of Acheson, and it offers proposals for the Court to decide the case in a way that would not broadly undermine public-law litigation.
Citation
Rachel Bayefsky, Public-Law Litigation at a Crossroads: Article III Standing and ’Tester’ Plaintiffs, New York University Law Review Online (2024).
UVA Law Faculty Affiliations
Rachel Bayefsky
Constitutional Law
Center for the Study of Race and Law
More in This Category