Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-297_4g25.pdf
Page Number: 38

Cite as:  594 U. S. ____ (2021) 

7 

THOMAS, J., dissenting 

The  principle  that  the  violation  of  an  individual  right 
gives  rise  to  an  actionable  harm  was  widespread  at  the
founding, in early American history, and in many modern 
cases.  See Uzuegbunam, 592 U. S., at ___–___ (slip op., at 
5–8) (collecting cases); Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman, 455 
U. S. 363, 373 (1982) (“[T]he actual or threatened injury re-
quired by Art. III may exist solely by virtue of statutes cre-
ating legal rights, the invasion of which creates standing” 
(citing cases; brackets and internal quotation marks omit-
ted)).  And  this  understanding  accords  proper  respect  for
the power of Congress and other legislatures to define legal 
rights.  No one could seriously dispute, for example, that a 
violation of property rights is actionable, but as a general 
matter,  “[p]roperty  rights  are  created  by  the  State.” 
Palazzolo  v.  Rhode  Island,  533  U. S.  606,  626  (2001).    In 
light  of  this  history,  tradition,  and  common  practice,  our
test should be clear: So long as a “statute fixes a minimum
of recovery . . . , there would seem to be no doubt of the right
of  one  who  establishes  a  technical  ground  of  action  to  re-
cover  this  minimum  sum  without  any  specific  showing  of
loss.”  T. Cooley, Law of Torts *271.3  While the Court today 
discusses  the  supposed  failure  to  show  “injury  in  fact,” 
courts for centuries held that injury in law to a private right 

—————— 
Congress owes a duty to all Americans to legislate within its constitu-
tional confines.  But not every single American can sue over Congress’ 
failure to do so.  Only individuals who, at a minimum, establish harm
beyond  the  mere  violation  of  that  constitutional  duty  can  sue.    Cf. 
Fairchild v. Hughes, 258 U. S. 126, 129–130 (1922) (“Plaintiff has only
the right, possessed by every citizen, to require that the Government be
administered according to law and that the public moneys be not wasted. 
Obviously this general right does not entitle a private citizen to institute
in  the  federal  courts  a  suit  to  secure  by  indirection  a  determination 
whether a statute, if passed, or a constitutional amendment, about to be 
adopted, will be valid”). 

3 Etymology is also a helpful guide.  The word “injury” stems from the 
Latin  “injuria,”  which  combines  “in”  (expressing  negation)  and  “jus” 
(right, law, justice).  See Barnhart Dictionary of Etymology 529 (1988).