Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/22-506_nmip.pdf
Page Number: 52

Cite as:  600 U. S. ____ (2023) 

5 

KAGAN, J., dissenting 

A 
Missouri’s theory of standing, as accepted by the major-
ity, goes as follows.  MOHELA is a state-created corporation 
participating in the student-loan market.  As part of that
activity, it has contracted with the Department of Educa-
tion to service federally held loans—essentially, to handle 
billing  and  collect  payments  for  the  Federal  Government.
Under that contract, MOHELA receives an administrative 
fee  for  each  loan  serviced.  When  a  loan  is  canceled, 
MOHELA will not get a fee; so the Secretary’s plan will cost 
MOHELA  money.    And  if  MOHELA  is  harmed,  Missouri 
must  be  harmed,  because  the  corporation  is  a  “public  in-
strumentality”  and,  as  such,  “part  of  Missouri’s  govern-
ment.”  Brief for Respondents 16–17; see ante, at 8–9. 

Up to the last step, the theory is unexceptionable—except 
that it points to MOHELA as the proper plaintiff.  Financial 
harm is a classic injury in fact.  MOHELA plausibly alleges 
that it will suffer that harm as a result of the Secretary’s
plan.  So MOHELA can sue the Secretary, as the Govern-
ment  readily  concedes.  See  Tr.  of  Oral  Arg.  18.    But  not 
even  Missouri,  and  not  even  the  majority,  claims  that 
MOHELA’s revenue loss gets passed through to the State. 
As  further  discussed  below,  MOHELA  is  financially  inde-
pendent from Missouri—as corporations typically are, the
better to insulate their creators from financial loss.  See in-
fra, at 6.  So MOHELA’s revenue decline—the injury in fact
claimed to justify this suit—is not in fact Missouri’s.  The 
State’s  treasury  will  not  be  out  one  penny  because  of  the
Secretary’s plan.  The revenue loss allegedly grounding this
case is MOHELA’s alone. 

Which leads to an obvious question: Where’s MOHELA? 
The  answer  is:  As  far  from  this  suit  as  it  can  manage.
MOHELA  could  have  brought  this  suit.  It  possesses  the
power under Missouri law to “sue and be sued” in its own 
name.  Mo. Rev. Stat. §173.385.1(3) (2016).  But MOHELA 
is not a party here.  Nor is it an amicus.  Nor is it even a