Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-309_4f15.pdf
Page Number: 14.0

12 

CARNEY v. ADAMS 

Opinion of the Court 

transfer  program  open  for  application  each  year,  so  there
was no doubt that the plaintiff ’s injury was imminent.  Id., 
at 256.  The Court therefore concluded that he was “ ‘able 
and ready’ ” to apply as a transfer student.  Id., at 262.  Un-
like Adams, none of these plaintiffs relied on a bare state-
ment  of  intent  alone  against  the  context  of  a  record  that
shows  nothing  more  than  an  abstract  generalized  griev-
ance.  Rather, each introduced at least some evidence that, 
e.g., they had applied in the past, there were regular oppor-
tunities  available  with  relevant  frequency,  and  they  were
“able and ready” to apply for them. 

By way of contrast, our precedents have also said that a 
plaintiff need not “translat[e ]” his or her “desire for a job 
. . . into a formal application” where that application would 
be  merely  a  “futile  gesture.”    Teamsters  v.  United  States, 
431  U. S.  324,  365–366  (1977);  see  also  Sporhase  v.  Ne-
braska ex rel. Douglas, 458 U. S. 941, 944, n. 2 (1982).  And 
we have said that an “aggrieved party ‘need not allege that 
he would have obtained the benefit but for the [unlawful]
barrier in order to establish standing.’ ”  Adarand Construc-
tors, supra, at 211; see also Gratz, supra, at 262; Associated 
Gen. Contractors, supra, at 666.  We do not here depart from
or modify these or any other of the precedents to which we
have referred. 

Rather, our holding follows from a straightforward appli-
cation  of  precedent  to  the  particular  summary  judgment
record before us.  And, as we have explained, in the context 
set forth by the evidence, Adams has not shown that he was 
“able and ready” to apply in the imminent future.  Conse-
quently, he has failed to show that “personal,” “concrete,”
and “imminent” injury upon which our standing precedents 
insist. 

For these reasons, we reverse the Third Circuit’s decision 
in  respect  to  standing,  vacate  the  judgment,  and  remand
with instructions to dismiss the case. 

It is so ordered.