Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-968_8nj9.pdf
Page Number: 15.0

12 

UZUEGBUNAM v. PRECZEWSKI 

Opinion of the Court 

for some claims); and meet all other relevant requirements. 
We hold only that, for the purpose of Article III standing, 
nominal damages provide the necessary redress for a com-
pleted violation of a legal right. 

Applying this principle here is straightforward.  For pur-
poses of this appeal, it is undisputed that Uzuegbunam ex-
perienced a completed violation of his constitutional rights 
when  respondents  enforced  their  speech  policies  against
him.  Because “every violation [of a right] imports damage,” 
Webb,  29  F. Cas.,  at  509,  nominal  damages  can  redress 
Uzuegbunam’s  injury  even  if  he  cannot  or  chooses  not  to 
quantify that harm in economic terms.*

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the
case  is  remanded  for  further  proceedings  consistent  with
this opinion. 

It is so ordered. 

—————— 

*We  do  not  decide  whether  Bradford  can  pursue  nominal  damages.
Nominal damages go only to redressability and are unavailable where a
plaintiff  has  failed  to  establish  a  past,  completed  injury.    The  District 
Court  should  determine  in  the  first  instance  whether  the  enforcement 
against Uzuegbunam also violated Bradford’s constitutional rights.