Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-411_3dq3.pdf
Page Number: 26.0

Cite as:  603 U. S. ____ (2024) 

21 

Opinion of the Court 

that  Hines  has  eked  out  a  showing  of  traceability  for  her 
past injuries, the past is relevant only insofar as it predicts
the future.  And this weak record gives her little momentum
going forward. 

3 
To  obtain  forward-looking  relief,  the  plaintiffs  must  es-
tablish a substantial risk of future injury that is traceable
to the Government defendants and likely to be redressed by
an  injunction  against  them.  To  carry  that  burden,  the 
plaintiffs must proffer evidence that the defendants’ “alleg-
edly  wrongful  behavior  w[ould]  likely  occur  or  continue.” 
—————— 
citizenship question on the census.  588 U. S., at 761, 764.  They argued 
that this question would make noncitizens less likely to respond to the 
census, leading to an inaccurate population count and the concomitant 
loss  of  congressional  seats  and  federal  funding.  Id.,  at  766–767.    The 
plaintiffs’ injuries thus depended on the actions of third parties.  Id., at 
767–768.  The District Court found that noncitizens had historically re-
sponded at lower rates than citizens to previous versions of the census 
(and other surveys) that included a citizenship question and that noncit-
izens were disproportionately likely to stop responding to those question-
naires once they reached the citizenship question.  New York v. United 
States Dept. of Commerce, 351 F. Supp. 3d 502, 578–579 (SDNY 2019). 
Crediting  those  findings,  this  Court  concluded  that  the  plaintiffs  “met 
their burden of showing that third parties will likely react in predictable 
ways to the citizenship question.”  Department of Commerce, 588 U. S., 
at 768.  The dissent suggests that it “would have been difficult for [the 
plaintiffs] to determine which noncitizen households failed to respond to 
the  census  because  of  a  citizenship  question  and  which had  other  rea-
sons.”  Post, at 20.  But the evidence made clear that the citizenship ques-
tion drove noncitizens’ lower response rates; the District Court made no 
findings about noncitizens’ response rates to the census generally.  Here, 
by contrast, the evidence is murky.  Facebook targeted Hines’ posts (and 
others like hers) before the White House entered the picture, meaning 
that Facebook had independent incentives to restrict Hines’ content.  It 
is therefore difficult to say that the White House was responsible (even 
in part) for all of Hines’ later restrictions—especially absent clear links 
between White House content-moderation requests to Facebook and Fa-
cebook’s actions toward Hines.  Cf. post, at 21.