In TransUnion v. Ramirez, the Supreme Court reiterated that the Constitution prevents uninjured plaintiffs from suing in federal court. The decision is a ringing endorsement of the principle announced five years earlier in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins that Article III requires that injuries be “real” and “concrete,” and that a mere statutory violation, standing alone, is not enough to sue. Significantly, TransUnion makes clear that these standing requirements apply to absent class members as well, and that federal courts cannot award damages to absent class members who lack standing. The presentation will discuss the impact of TransUnion on class action litigation, including how defendants can invoke TransUnion to oppose class certification on standing grounds and how the plaintiffs’ bar might seek to adapt to TransUnion.
Stay up-to-date on our perspectivesSubscribe to Email