Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-1008_1b82.pdf
Page Number: 37.0

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

9 

KAVANAUGH, J., concurring 

competitors.  For  example,  in  National  Credit  Union 
Administration v. First National Bank & Trust Co., several 
banks challenged the decision of a federal agency to approve
a  series  of  amendments  to  the  charter  of  a  federal  credit 
union, a competitor of the banks.  522 U. S. 479, 484–485 
(1998).  The amendments were controversial because they 
expanded  the  markets  in  which  the  credit  union  could 
operate, thereby increasing competition against the banks.
The Court held that the banks could sue under the APA to 
those  charter 
challenge 
amendments,  and  also  that  the  agency’s  approval  of  the
amendments was unlawful.  Of course, the District Court 
could  remedy  the  banks’  harm  only  by  vacating  the 
approval of the amendments.  In short, for the plaintiff in 
First National Bank to have a remedy, the APA must have 
authorized vacatur. 

the  agency’s  approval  of 

Those competitor suits are ubiquitous in administrative
law. 
Some  plaintiffs  have  challenged  the  favorable
classification  of  a  competitor’s  drugs  or  medical  products, 
see, e.g., American Bioscience, Inc. v. Thompson, 269 F. 3d 
1077  (CADC  2001);  a  research  guideline  that  increased 
competition for federal grants, see, e.g., Sherley v. Sebelius, 
610  F. 3d  69  (CADC  2010);  and  a  competitor’s  exemption
from a generally applicable rule, see, e.g., Regular Common 
Carrier Conference v. United States, 793 F. 2d 376 (CADC 
1986)  (arose  under  the  review  provision  in  28  U. S. C. 
§2342).  The Court has consistently held that the plaintiffs
incurring those injuries are “adversely affected or aggrieved
by agency action” within the meaning of the APA.  5 U. S. C. 
§702; see First Nat. Bank, 522 U. S., at 488, 499; Investment 
Company Institute v. Camp, 401 U. S. 617, 618–621 (1971); 
Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. 
v.  Camp,  397  U. S.  150,  157  (1970).    But  such  competitor
suits would be largely if not entirely eradicated if the APA 
and  similar  statutory  review  provisions  did  not  authorize 
vacatur.