Opinion ID: 552172
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: naral/pa

Text: 27 NARAL/PA was also dismissed by the district court for lack of standing. Generally, parties claiming standing must demonstrate a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy, Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 204, 82 S.Ct. 691, 703, 7 L.Ed.2d 663 (1962) (emphasis added). Where a representative organization is involved, however, personal stake is not needed to invoke federal-court jurisdiction. Even in the absence of injury to itself, [such] an association may have standing solely as the representative of its members. Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 511, 95 S.Ct. 2197, 2211, 45 L.Ed.2d 343 (1975). This rule recognizes that the primary reason people join an organization is often to create an effective vehicle for vindicating interests that they share with others. International Union, UAW v. Brock, 477 U.S. 274, 290, 106 S.Ct. 2523, 2533, 91 L.Ed.2d 228 (1986). 28 In plaintiffs' complaint, NARAL/PA alleges, among other things, that it is suing on behalf of ... its members, who include women who will need to use abortion and family planning facilities in Southeastern Pennsylvania. An organization can avail itself of the doctrine of associational standing and sue on behalf of its members if  '(a) its members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right; (b) the interests it seeks to protect are germane to the organization's purpose; and (c) neither the claim asserted nor the relief requested requires the participation of individual members in the lawsuit.'  New York State Club Ass'n. v. City of New York, 487 U.S. 1, 9, 108 S.Ct. 2225, 2232, 101 L.Ed.2d 1 (1988) (quoting Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Comm'n, 432 U.S. 333, 343, 97 S.Ct. 2434, 2441, 53 L.Ed.2d 383 (1977)). 29 The latter two requirements are easily met. First, NARAL/PA's interest in enjoining the defendants from blockading abortion clinics is certainly germane to its organizational purpose. NARAL/PA's stated mission is to protect women's right to safe and legal abortions. This interest is clearly imperilled by Operation Rescue's efforts to deny women access to facilities that provide abortions. Second, the causes of action alleged and the relief requested do not require the participation of individual members in the litigation. NARAL/PA seeks declaratory and injunctive relief that will benefit its members who wish to visit abortion clinics in the Philadelphia area. See Warth, 422 U.S. at 515, 95 S.Ct. at 2213 (If in a proper case the association seeks a declaration, injunction, or some other form of prospective relief, it can reasonably be supposed that the remedy, if granted, will inure to the benefit of those members of the association actually injured.). Moreover, on the basis of the submissions before it, the district court granted plaintiffs summary judgment on their actions for trespass and intentional interference with contractual relations. The court, without the need for participation by individual class members, concluded that defendants interfered with the clinic-patient relationship with the purpose or intent of harming the plaintiff[s] by preventing the relationship from occurring. 710 F.Supp. at 585-86. 30 The remaining element of the test for associational standing, however, is more problematic. Under this element, an association has standing to sue on behalf of its members when those members would have standing to bring the same suit. New York State Club Ass'n, 487 U.S. at 9, 108 S.Ct. at 2232. The purpose of this requirement is simply to weed out plaintiffs who try to bring cases, which could not otherwise be brought, by manufacturing allegations of standing that lack any real foundation. Id. According standing to NARAL/PA does not contravene this purpose, for we think that NARAL/PA has alleged real injury to its members. 31 As the district court has already found, defendants' conduct threatens the rights of both abortion clinics and their patients. NARAL/PA seeks to represent a subset of the latter group--i.e., female members of NARAL/PA who in the future may require the services offered at Philadelphia area clinics. Accordingly, NARAL/PA must show that these members have suffered some actual or threatened harm as a result of Operation Rescue's putatively illegal conduct. See Valley Forge Christian College, 454 U.S. at 472, 102 S.Ct. at 758. As we mentioned above, NARAL/PA, in its complaint, alleges that its members include women who will need to use abortion and family planning facilities in the area targeted by defendants. This assertion, which was neither denied nor challenged below, is sufficient to establish that defendants' illegal demonstrations threaten to injure NARAL/PA's members by blocking their access to Philadelphia area clinics. We note further that since NARAL/PA has averred that some of its members will seek the general gynecological and family planning services offered by these facilities, it need not produce a member actually seeking an abortion. 5 32 Because the three requirements of associational standing are met, we conclude that NARAL/PA has standing to sue on behalf of its members who will need to use the co-plaintiffs' facilities in the future. 6 Accord New York National Organization for Women, 886 F.2d at 1348. We therefore will reverse the district court's dismissal of NARAL/PA as a plaintiff.