Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/17-1712_0971.pdf
Page Number: 29

16 

THOLE v. U. S. BANK N. A. 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

that view.  Compare Varity Corp., 516 U. S., at 507 (“This 
argument fails”), with id., at 516 (THOMAS, J., dissenting). 
Nor is that argument persuasive on its own terms.  The 
concurrence  relies  on  a  compound  prepositional  phrase
taken  out  of  context,  collecting  ERISA  provisions  saying
that a fiduciary acts “with respect to” a plan.  See ante, at 2 
(opinion  of  THOMAS, J.).  Of  course  a  plan  fiduciary  per-
forms  her  duties  “with  respect  to  a  plan.”  29  U. S. C. 
§1104(a)(1).  After all, she manages the plan.  §1102(a).  But 
she  does  so  “solely  in  the  interest”  and  “for  the  exclusive 
purposes”  of  the  plan’s  “participants  and  beneficiaries.” 
§§1103(a), (c)(1), 1104(a)(1). 

In short, the concurrence gets it backwards.  Congress did
not  enact  ERISA  to  protect  plans  as  artificial  entities.    It 
enacted  ERISA  (and  required  trusts  in  the  first  place)  to
protect  the  plan  “participants”  and  “their  beneficiaries.” 
§1001(b).  Thus, ERISA fiduciary duties run where the stat-
ute says: to the participants and their beneficiaries. 

C 
Last, petitioners have standing to sue on their retirement

plan’s behalf. 

1 
Even if petitioners had no suable interest in their plan’s
financial integrity or its competent supervision, the plan it-
self would.  There is no disputing at this stage that respond-
ents’  “mismanagement”  caused  the  plan  “approximately 
$750 million in losses” still not fully reimbursed.  Ante, at 2 
(majority opinion).  And even under the concurrence’s view, 
respondents’ fiduciary duties “are owed to the plan.”  Ante, 
at  2  (opinion  of  THOMAS, J.).  The  plan  thus  would  have 
standing to sue under either theory discussed above.

The problem is that the plan is a legal fiction: Although 
ERISA provides that a retirement plan “may sue . . . as an 
entity,” 29 U. S. C. §1132(d)(1), someone must still do so on