# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 6- 32 42

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ E.L., a m in or , by La’Shei ka W hi te th e Mo th er, le ga l gu ard ia n, an d ne xt fri en d of E.L.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

Vol un ta ry

Int erd is tri ct Ch oi ce Co rp or at io n

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Apri l 5 , 20 17 Fil ed : J ul y

27 , 20 17

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re COLLOTON, BEAM, and BENTON, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ BENTON, Circu it Ju dg e.

On be ha lf of E.L., he r m in or so n, La’Shi ek a W hi te su ed t h e V o lu nt ary In te rd is tri ct Ch oi ce Co rp or at io n (VICC )
, al le gi ng it s race -b as ed
, sc ho ol -tr an sf er
po li cy vi ol at es th e Equ al Pro te ct io n C l a us e of th e Fo ur te en th Am en dm en t. Thedi st ric t co ur t gr an te d VICC’s m ot io n to di sm i s s

. H a v i ng juri sd ic ti on un de r 28 1 U.S.C. § 1 29 1, t hi s co ur t af fir m s.

I.

E.L. i s an Afri can -Am eri can bo y en te rin g fif th gr ad e. Fro m ki nd erg art en th ro ug h th ird gr ad e, he li ve d in th e Ci ty of St

. Lou is
, at te nd in g Ga t eway Sci en ce Acad em y , a ch art er sc ho ol th ere. Dur in g th ird gr ad e, hi s fam il y m ov ed to St

. Lou is
Co un ty, in th e Pat to nv il le Sch oo l Dis tri ct

. His m ot he r as ke d Gate way to en ro ll hi m in fo ur th gr ad e ev en th ou gh th ey no lo ng er li ve d in th e ci ty li m it s. Gate way de cl in ed
, pr ov id in g a co py of it s po li cy th at Afri can -Am eri can st ud en ts who li v e ou ts id e th e ci ty are no t el ig ib le for en ro ll m en t.

E.L. sue d, al le gi ng eq ua l p ro te ct io n vi ol at io ns

. He di d n ot na m e Gat eway as

a de fen da nt , bu t su ed on ly VI C C
, a n on -p ro fit co rp or at io n crea te d by a 19 99

se tt le m en t ag reem en t in th e lo ng -s ta nd in g Li dd el l li ti ga t i o n

. Th e fed eral la wsu it
, fil ed in 19 72 by Afri can -Am eri can pa ren ts , al l eg ed St

. Lou is op erat ed se gr eg at ed

sc ho ol s in vi ol at io n of th e Equ al Pro te ct io n Cl au se

. In 19 83
, a di st ric t co ur t ap pr ov ed a d es eg reg at io n s et tl em en t ag reem en t. Se e Lid de ll v. Bo ar d of Ed

uc. of Cit y o f St

. Loui s, St at e of Mo

. , 56 7 F. Su pp

. 10 37 (E.D. Mo

. 19 83 ), af f’d in pa rt , re v’d in pa rt , 73 1 F.2 d 12 94 (8 th Ci r. 19 84 ) (en ba nc ). The ag reem en t— fu nd ed by th e de fen da nt s (th e st at e o f M i s so ur i an d th e Ci ty Bo ard of Edu cat io n) —p ro vi de d cap it al im pr ov em en ts of ci ty sc ho ol s, es ta bl is hm en t of ci ty m ag ne t sc ho ol s, an d a vo lu nt ary in te rd is tri ct tra ns fer pl an

. The tra ns fer pl an , at is su e he re, al lo wed Afri can -Am eri can
st ud en ts li vi ng in th e ci t y t o t r a n sf er to th e co un ty, an d whi te st ud en ts li vi ng in th e

co un ty to t ran sf

er t o t he cit y

.

The Hon or ab le Ro nn ie L. W hi te , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e East ern 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.

-2

-In 19 96
, th e st at e of Mi ss ou ri m ov ed fo r a de cl arat io n th at St

. Lou is no lo ng er

op erat ed a se gr eg at ed
, du al pu bl ic sc ho ol syste m

. The co ur t ap po in te d a se tt le m en t

co or di na to r to ne go ti at e a res ol ut io n. In 19 99
, th e pa rti es se tt le d ag ai n. Se e Lid de ll

v. Bo ar d of

Ed uc. of Ci ty of

St

. Loui s , 19 99 W L 33 31 42 10
, at *9 (E.D. Mo

. Mar

. 12
, 19 99 ) (ap pr ov in g se tt le m en t ag reem en t). The 19 99 ag reem en t es ta bl is he d VICC to ad m in is te r th e vo lu nt ary in te rd is tri c t tra ns fer pr og ram , in cl ud in g: (1 ) arra ng in g
tra ns po rta ti on fo r s t u d e nt s in th e tra ns fer pr og ram ; (2 ) di st rib ut in g fu nd in g to
pa rti ci pa ti ng sc ho ol s; an d (3 ) di ss em in at in g in fo rm at io n ab ou t el ig i b i l it y
req ui rem en ts (ta ke n pr im ari ly fro m th e 19 83 ag reem en t). Th e 19 99 ag reem en t
pe rm it s on ly th e se nd in g an d rece iv ing dis tr ic ts to m od ify th e el ig ib il it y req ui rem en ts

.

Th e di st ric t co ur t gr an te d VICC’s m ot io n to di sm is s on fo ur al te rn at iv e
gr ou nd s: (1 ) E.L. la ck s st an di ng ; (2 ) he fai ls to st at e a cl ai m ; (3 ) th e 19 99 ag reem en t
pr ecl ud es hi s cl ai m s; an d (4 ) th e 19 99 ag reem en t rel eas es VICC fro m li ab il it y

. E.L.
ap pe al s.

II.

Thi s co ur t rev ie ws “ a de ci si on di sm is si ng a co m pl ai nt fo r la ck of st an di ng de

no v o, co ns tru in g th e al le ga ti on s of th e co m pl ai nt , an d th e reas on ab le in fere nc es dr awn th eref

ro m , m os t fav or ab ly to th e pl ai nt iff .” Mi ll er v. Ci ty of

St

. Paul
, 82 3 F.3 d
50 3, 50 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ). “ Arti cl e III st an di ng is a th res ho ld qu es ti on in ev ery fed eral

co ur t cas e.” Unit

ed St at es v. One Linc ol

n Nav ig at or 19 98
, 32 8 F.3 d 10 11
, 10 13 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 ). St an di n g r e q u i r es th ree el em en ts : (1 ) “ in jury in fact ”; (2 ) “ a cau sa l

co nn ect io n be twee n th e in jury an d th e co nd uc t co m

pl ai ne d of

”; an d (3 ) th e li ke li ho od

“ th at th e in

jury wil l be ‘ red res se d by a fav or ab le de ci si on .’ ” Luja n v. Defen de rs of
Wi ld li fe
, 50 4 U.S. 55 5, 56 0- 61 (1 99 2)
, qu ot in g Si m on v. Ea st

er n Ky. Wel

fa re Ri gh ts Org

. , 42 6 U.S. 2 6, 3 8 (1 97 6)

.

-3

-A.

An in jury in f a c t r e q u i r e s th at a pl ai nt iff de m on st rat e he or sh e is “ ab le an d read y ” to ap pl y fo r an ed uc at io na l op po rtu ni ty an d “ a di sc riminat or y po li cy pr ev en ts [th em ] fro m do in g so on an eq ua l ba si s.” Gra tz v. Bo ll in ge r , 53 9 U.S. 24 4, 26 2 (2 00 3)
, qu ot in g Nor th ea st er n Fl a. Cha pt er , As so ci at ed Gen. Co nt

ra ct or s of Am

. v. Ja ck so nvi ll e , 50 8 U.S. 65 6, 66 6 (1 99 3)

. “ It is well es ta bl is he d th at in te nt m ay be rel ev an t to st an di ng in an eq ua l pr ot ect io n ch al le ng e.” Id

. at 26 1. Und er Gra tz , in di vi du al s m

us t sh ow th at th ey in te nd to ap pl y to a sc ho ol in or de r to ha ve st an di ng
to ch al le ng e a di sc riminat or y ad m is si on s po li cy

. Se e id

. at 26 0- 61

. Se e al

so Shea v. Ker ry , 79 6 F.3 d 42
, 50 (D.C. Ci r. 20 15 ) (“ Gra tz co nt ro ls ou r in qu iry. Lik e [th e Gra tz pl ai nt if f ], [th e pl ai nt iff he re] al le ge s th at he po ss es se d an in te nt to ap pl y to th e
po si ti on in qu es ti on .”); Ca rr ol l v. Nak at

an i
, 34 2 F.3 d 9 34
, 94 2 (9 th Ci r. 20 03 ) (ap pl y in g Gra tz to req ui re “ a le gi ti m at e in te nt io n t o a pp ly”).

E.L. cl ai m s two in

juri es in fact by de ni al s of th e op po rtu ni ty to at te nd Gate way

an d ci ty m ag ne t sc ho ol s. The fir st —d en ia l of th e op po rtu ni ty to at te nd Gate way —i s

an in jury in fact

. E.L. at te nd ed th ere fo r fo ur y ears w h i l e li vi ng in th e ci ty. Se e §
16 0.4 10 .1(1 ) RSMo (req ui rin g c ha rte r sc ho ol s to en ro ll “ [a]ll pu pi ls res id en t in th e di st ric t in whi ch it op erat es ”). The co m pl ai nt al le ge s th at aft er m ov in g to th e co un ty, he so ug ht to co nt in ue hi s en ro ll m en t, bu t was de ni ed

. He is th us “ ab le an d read y ” to

en ro ll
, bu t pro hi bi te d fro m do in g so by an al le ge dl y “ di sc riminat or y po li cy .” Gra tz , 53 9 U.S. at 26 2.

The sec on d— de ni al of t he op po rtu ni ty t o at te nd ci ty m ag ne t s ch oo ls —i s n ot

an in jury in fact

. W hi le th e co m pl ai nt refe ren ces m ag ne t sc ho ol s an d VICC’s tra ns fer

po li cy fo r th em , it do es no t al le ge E.L. is in te res te d in en ro ll in g. To th e co nt rary, hi s

co m pl ai nt su gg es ts th at he is in te res te d in at te nd in g o nl y Gate way

. His m ot io n fo r

a pr el im in ary in

jun ct io n co nf

irms t h i s , se ek in g “ to pe rm it E.L. to co nt in ue hi s acad em ic su cces s at Gate way .” Ci ti ng Gra tz , E.L. arg ue s th at whe th er he “ ‘actu al ly

-4

-ap pl ie d’ fo r ad m is si on as a tra ns fer st ud en t [to a m ag ne t sc ho ol ] is no t de te rm in at iv e

of hi s ab il it y to se ek in

jun ct iv e rel ie f in th is cas e.” Se e id

. at 26 0- 61

. Thi s co ur t

a g r e e s

. Howev er, he m us t st il l sh ow so m e “ in te nt to ap pl y .” Id

. at 26 1. Th e

m en ti on of m ag ne t sc ho ol s an d th e ge ne ral iz ed gr ie va nc e a bo ut VICC’s tra ns fer

po li cy for th em is in su ffi ci en t t o a ll eg e an in jury in fa ct

.

B.

“ [T]here m

us t be a cau sa l co nn ect io n be twee n th e in jur y an d th e co nd uc t

co m pl ai ne d of

—t he in jury h as t o b e f

a i r l y t race ab le to th e ch al le ng ed act io n of th e de fen da nt , an d no t th e res ul t of th e in de pe nd en t act io n of so m e th ird pa rty no t be fo re
t h e co ur t.” Luja n , 50 4 U.S. at 56 0 (al te rat io ns in co rp or at ed ) (in te rn al qu ot at i o n

m ark s om it te d)

. “ W he n th e in jury al le ge d is th e res ul t of act io ns by so m e th ird pa rty,

no t th e de fen da nt , t he pl ai nt iff can no t sa ti sf y th e c a u s a t io n el em en t of th e st an di ng in qu iry.” Mi ll

er v. Red wo od Tox ic ol

og y Lab ., In c. , 68 8 F.3 d 92 8, 93 5 (8 th C ir.
20 12 ).

E.L.’ s co m

pl ai nt al le ge s VICC de ni ed hi m th e op po rtu ni ty to at te nd Gate way

on an eq ua l ba si s. Thi s al le ga ti on is in su ffi c i e n t t o c o nf er st an di ng be cau se it 2

erro ne ou sl y as su m es VICC’s po li cy , no t Ga te way ’s, was th e reas on he was de ni ed ad m is si on

. Thro ug ho ut br ie fin g an d ar gum en t, E

. L

. sta tes: “ Bec au se VICC’s tra ns fer

po li cy is th e on ly on e th at di sc riminat es on th e ba si s of race , it lo gi cal ly fo ll ows th at VICC’s po li cy cau se s E.L.’ s in jury—un e q u a l tre at m en t on th e ba si s of race .” Bu t Gate way ’s po li cy al so di ffer en ti at es ba se d on race : “ If ad dr es s is no t fo un d on th e

E.L.’ s br ie f st at es : “ Gate way ad m in is tra to rs to ld La’Shi ek a th at VICC’s 2
tra ns fer p ol ic y

pre ve nt ed E.L. fro m

att en di ng th e sc ho ol be cau se of h is race .” Thi s st at em en t is no t su pp or te d by th e co m pl ai nt

. It st at es on ly th at he was de ni ed ad m is si on “ be cau se of hi s race ” an d “ Gate way of fic ia ls ga ve La’Shi ek a a ha nd ou t

ex pl ai ni ng th e en ro ll m en t re qu ire m en ts .”

-5

-ci ty si te or th e zi p co de is no t li st ed ab ov e an d t h e s t u d e n t id en ti fie s as Afri can

A mer ic an , y ou can no t en ro ll th e st ud en t.” And Gate way pr ov id ed a co py of th i s
po li cy , no t VICC’s, to su pp or t th e de ni al of ad m is si on

. VICC’s po li cy —wh ic h was

ne ve r ci te d by Gate way as a reas on fo r de nyin g ad m is si on —d oe s no t ap pl y to ch art er

sc ho ol s, whi ch are “ in d e p e n d e n t pu bl ic sc ho ol [s ], ” go ve rn ed by st at ut e. Se e §§
16 0.4 00 -1 60 .42 5 RSMo

. Thu s, VICC ha s no ad m in is tra ti ve or su pe rv is or y au th or it y

ov er t he m

.

St il l, E.L. arg ue s VICC ca u s e d hi s in jury be cau se st at e la w req ui res ch art er

sc ho ol s to en ro ll an y st ud en t el ig ib le to tra ns fer un de r th e vo lu nt ary tra ns fer pr og ram

. Se e § 16 0.4 10 .1(2 ) RSMo (req ui rin g ch art er sc ho ol s to en ro ll “ Non res id en t pu pi ls el ig ib le to at te nd a di st ric t’s sc ho ol un de r an ur ba n vo lu n t a r y t r an sf er pr og ram .”).
St at ed di ffer en tl y , E.L. th in ks § 16 0.4 10 .1(2 ) le ga ll y i mp o s e s V ICC’s po li cy on ch art er s ch oo ls

. Se e Benn et t v. Sp ea r , 52 0 U.S. 1 54 , 16 8- 70 (19 97 ).

Eve n if VICC’s po li cy ap pl ie s to ch art er sc ho ol s un de r § 16 0.4 10 .1(2 ), VICC

st il l wou ld no t cau se E.L.’ s in jury. VICC do es no t m ak e or ad op t ru le s or reg ul at io ns fo r ch art er sc ho ol s; Gate way an d th e st at e of Mi ss ou ri do

. The st at e of Mi ss ou ri te ll s Gate way it m

us t ad m it “ [n ]onr es id en t pu pi ls el ig ib le to a t te nd a di st ric t’s sc ho ol

un de r an ur ba n vo lu nt ary tra ns fe r p r o g r a m.” § 16 0.4 10 .1(2 ) RSMo

. Ass um in g §
160. 410 .1(2 ) in co rp or at es VICC’s po li cy in to st at e la w go ve rn in g ch art er sc hool s, the

st at e of Mi ss ou ri, no t VICC, cau se s th e in jury. Se e Mi ll

er , 68 8 F.3 d at 93 5- 36 (h ol di ng pl ai nt iff la ck ed st a n d i n g t o su e a to xi co lo gy la b fo r “ erro ne ou s pr ob at io n

v i o l a t i o n rep or ts ” be cau se th e St at e of Mi nn es ot a, no t th e la b, cau se d th e in ju r y be cau s e i t “ ch os e th e pa rti cu la r te st , ul ti m at el y es ta bl is he d an d im pl em en te d th e

cu t-o ff le ve ls fo r th e pr ob at io ne rs it te st ed
, an d in te rp ret ed th e te st res ul ts ”).
S i mi l arl y , Gate way , no t VICC, de ci de d to fo ll ow § 16 0.4 10 .1(2 ) rat he r th an §
16 0.4 10 .3, whi ch pr oh ib it s ch art e r s c h o o l s fro m li m it in g ad m is si on ba se d on race

. Se e RSMo § 16 0.4 10 .3 (“ A c ha rte r sc ho ol s h a l l n o t li m it ad m is si on ba se d on race

. . . .”). And Gate way , no t VICC, de ni ed E.L. ad m i s s i o n

. E. L.’ s arg um en t— th at

-6

-VICC’s tra ns fer po li cy , by op erat io n of § 16 0.4 10 .1(2 ), pr ev en ts ch art er sc ho ol s fro m

en ro ll in g Afri can -Am eri can co un ty res id en ts —i s wit ho ut m eri t

. Se e Benn et t , 52 0 U.S. at 16 8- 69 (h ol di ng th at whe re th e in jury co m pl ai ne d o f r es ul ts fro m th e

“ in de pe nd en t act io n of so m e th ird pa rty no t be fo re th e co ur t,” st an di ng can st il l ex is t, bu t on ly i f th e in

jury is “ pr od uc ed by d et erm in at iv e or co erci ve effe ct ” of th e pa rty

su ed ).

E. L.’s al le ge d in

jury is no t “ fai rly tra ceab le ” to VICC. Luja n , 50 4 U.S. at 56 0- 61

.

* * * * * * * E.L. lack s s ta nd in g. Th e jud gm en t i s af fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-7

-