Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf
Page Number: 54

Cite as:  600 U. S. ____ (2023) 

7 

KAGAN, J., dissenting 

all its varied interests.  §173.385.1(3); see supra, at 5.  In-
deed, before this case, Missouri had never tried to appear
in court on MOHELA’s behalf.  That is no surprise.  In the 
statutory  scheme,  independence  is  everywhere:  State  law 
created MOHELA, but in so doing set it apart.

The Missouri Supreme Court itself recognized as much in 
addressing  a  near-carbon-copy  state 
instrumentality.
MOHEFA  (note  the  one-letter  difference)  issues  bonds  to
support various health and educational institutions in the 
State.  Like MOHELA, MOHEFA is understood as a “public 
instrumentality”  serving  a  “public  function.”    Menorah 
Medical Center v. Health and Ed. Facilities Auth., 584 S. W. 
2d 73, 76 (Mo. 1979).  And like MOHELA, MOHEFA has a 
board appointed by the Governor and sends annual reports
to  a  state  department.  See  Mo.  Rev.  Stat.  §§360.020,
360.140 (1978); ante, at 9 (suggesting those features mat-
ter).  But the State Supreme Court, when confronted with
a claim that MOHEFA’s undertakings should be ascribed to
the  State,  could  hardly  have  been  more  dismissive.    The 
court thought it beyond dispute that MOHEFA “is not the 
[S]tate,” and that its activities are not state activities.  Me-
norah, 584 S. W. 2d, at 78.  Citing MOHEFA’s financial and 
legal independence, the court explained that “[s]imilar bod-
ies  have  been  adjudged  as  ‘separate  entities’  from”  Mis-
souri.  Ibid.  MOHELA is no different. 

Under  our  usual  standing  rules,  that  separation  would 
matter—indeed,  would  decide  this  case.    A  plaintiff,  this 
Court has held time and again, cannot rest its claim to ju-
dicial relief on the “legal rights and interests” of third par-
ties.  Warth, 422 U. S., at 499.  And MOHELA qualifies as
such a party, for all the reasons just given.  That MOHELA 
is publicly created makes not a whit of difference: When a 
“government instrumentalit[y]” is “established as [a] jurid-
ical entit[y] distinct and independent from [its] sovereign,” 
the  law—including  the  law  of  standing—is  supposed  to
treat it that way.  Bancec, 462 U. S., at 626–627; see Sloan