Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-280_ba7d.pdf
Page Number: 21

18 

NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSN., INC. v. 
CITY OF NEW YORK 
ALITO, J., dissenting 

remand the case for proceedings on the question of reme-
dies.  We have frequently done this when we reverse a judg-
ment  that  was  entered  against  the  plaintiff  on  liability 
grounds.  See, e.g., Mission Product Holdings, 587 U. S., at 
___,  ___  (deeming  case  live  due  to  claim  for  damages,  re-
versing  judgment  against  petitioner,  and  remanding  for 
further  proceedings);  Parents  Involved  in  Community 
Schools v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1, 551 U. S. 701, 720, 748 
(2007)  (holding  case  live  due  in  part  to  damages  claim  in 
complaint, reversing judgment against petitioners, and re-
manding for further proceedings); Firefighters v. Stotts, 467 
U. S.  561,  583  (1984)  (holding  case  live  due  to  damages
caused by lower court injunction and reversing); Powell v. 
McCormack, 395 U. S. 486, 493, 550 (1969) (remanding for 
award of unpaid congressional salary); cf., e.g., Richmond 
v. J. A. Croson Co., 488 U. S. 469, 478, n. 1 (1989) (holding 
that  expiration  of  challenged  ordinance  did  not  moot  dis-
pute  over  whether  defendant’s  action  was  “unlawful  and
thus entitle[d] appellee to damages”).

With this is mind, the possibility of actual damages can-
not be ruled out.  One or more of the petitioners could seek
compensation for out-of-pocket expenses, such as member-
ship fees at in-city ranges.  The current record shows that 
at least one of the petitioners is a member of a range in the 
City.  App. 93–94.  In addition, a petitioner may be entitled 
to  compensation  for  expenses  incurred  in  registering  for
out-of-city  competitions  from  which  he  was  compelled  to 
withdraw.  The record shows that one petitioner signed up
for such a competition but had to pull out as a result of the
City ordinance.  Id., at 32, 55.  Petitioners could also seek 
compensation for any intangible but nevertheless real and 
personal injuries that they suffered due to their inability to
attend  shooting  competitions,  to  practice  at  out-of-city
ranges, or to take their licensed handguns to second homes. 
Noneconomic damages such as loss of enjoyment are avail-
able in §1983 litigation.  See Stachura, 477 U. S., at 306–