Document: 48 L.Ed.2d 450 96 S.Ct. 1917 426 U.S. 26 William E. SIMON, Secretary of the Treasury, et al., Petitioners,v.EASTERN KENTUCKY WELFARE RIGHTS ORGANIZATION al. EASTERN Petitioners, v. Nos. 74-1124, 74-1110. Argued Dec. 10, 1975. Decided June 1, 1976. Syllabus Respondents in No. 74-1124 (hereinafter respondents), several low-income individuals and organizations representing such individuals, brought this class action District Court on behalf all persons unable to afford hospital services, against Treasury Commissioner Internal Revenue. They claimed that Revenue Ruling 69-545, which announced an Service policy extending favorable tax treatment under Code 1954 (Code) hospitals did not serve indigents extent hospitals' financial ability, "encouraged" deny services indigents, was invalid because it erroneous interpretation had been issued violation Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The complaint described instances individual respondents refused treatment, their indigency, at enjoying challenged alleged be receiving substantial contributions as a result treatment. overruled motion dismiss petitioners petitioners), included challenge respondents' standing, and, cross-motions for summary judgment, held 69-545 void contrary Code. Appeals also found standing respondents, but upheld 69-545. Held : should have granted petitioners' failed establish bring suit. Pp. 37-46. (a) When plaintiff's is relevant inquiry whether, assuming justiciability claim, plaintiff has shown injury himself likely redressed by decision, unless showing made federal court cannot exercise its power consistent with "case or controversy" limitation Art. III Constitution. 37-39. (b) respondent organizations, no themselves Qua simply basis they are dedicated promoting access poor health services. An organization's abstract concern subject could affected adjudication does substitute concrete required III. Sierra Club Morton, 405 727, 92 1361, 31 636. 39-40. (c) Allegations members were denied indigency do case controversy suit, any officials. requires act only redress fairly can traced defendant, solely some third party. 40-42. (d) Though adoption purely speculative (1) whether denials service ascribable "encouragement" resulted from decisions apart considerations, (2) Court's remedial powers would make available respondents. Respondents' allegation them receive contributions, without more, those dependent upon contributions. It thus appears relied "on little more than remote possibility, unsubstantiated allegations fact, situation might better (petitioners) acted otherwise, improve (District Court) relief." Warth Seldin, 422 490, 507, 95 2197, 2209, 45 343, 360. Consequently, carry burden consequence prospective relief will remove harm. supra; Linda R. S. Richard D., 410 614, 93 1146, 35 536, followed. 42-46. 165 U.S.App.D.C. 239, 506 F.2d 1278, vacated remanded. Marin G. Rose, Washington, D. C., Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization others. Stuart A. Smith, Simon, Mr. Justice POWELL delivered opinion Court. 1 Several composed suit asserted (IRS) violated (APA) issuing allowing nonprofit offered emergency-room indigents. We conclude these plaintiffs lack 2 * Code, original version subsequent amendment, accords advantageous types corporations, including exemption income taxation deductibility benefactors amounts donations. Nonprofit never received benefits favored general category, able claim if qualify corporation "organized operated exclusively . charitable .1 purposes" within meaning § 501(c)(3) U.S.C. 501(c)(3). As define term "Charitable," status each determined case-by-case IRS. 3 In recognition need guidelines qualification "charitable" IRS 1956 56-185.2 This established position "that 'charitable' legal sense used 501(c) (3) contemplates implied public trust constituted benefit ." addition, set out four "general requirements" meet, "among other things," considered organization Only one requirements important re, reads follows: 4 "It must ability pay rendered who expected pay. normal charge order meet operating expenses institution, denying medical care others fact charity record relatively low conclusive purposes full ability. may furnish reduced rates below cost, thereby render manner. aside earnings uses improvements additions facilities. not, however, refuse accept patients Furthermore, operates expectation payment whom renders dispense merely fail rendered." 5 56-185 remained respect hospital's 13 years, until November 3, 1969.3 new two unidentified hospitals, referred Hospital A B, differed significantly both corporate structure policies.4 description following paragraph: 6 "The time emergency room requiring otherwise ordinarily limits admissions cost hospitalization, either themselves, through private insurance, aid programs Medicare. Patients admission another community indigent patients." 7 Despite A's apparent failure operate "to rendered," 56-185, exempt 501(c)(3).5 Noting serving "more restrictive" tse applied A, stated "Revenue hereby modified therefrom relating caring cost." II 8 Issuance led filing July 1971 United States Columbia, group individuals. unincorporated association6 corporations7 among represented interests obtaining 12 plaintiffs8 subsisting poverty levels Federal Government suffering conditions sued members, his own representative similarly situated. 9 Each occasion he member family disadvantaged seeking needed indigency. Most involved refusal admit person inability deposit advance fee, even though enrolled Medicare program. At least immediately. And treated then billed threatened although known 10 According complaint, incidents tax-exempt corporation, defendants. despite refusals fully indigent, defendants "encouraging" clients organizations. Those "injury opportunity organizations" intended beneficiaries sections grant 11 Plaintiffs principal claims. first granting charitable-corporation continued violation. Their theory legislative history regulations judicial precedent "Charitable" mean "relief poor," current practice departed interpretation. Plaintiffs' second issuance hearing submission views rulemaking procedures APA, 553. "substantive" rule opposed "interpretative" type exempted 553.9 sought various forms declaratory injunctive relief.10 By dismiss, plaintiffs' suggested nonjusticiability matter event barred Anti-Injunction Act,11 Declaratory Judgment Act,12 doctrine sovereign immunity. opinion. On judgment rejected defendants' arguments reaching merits. "improperly promulgated" "without effect" insofar permitted charities offering "special consideration pay." 370 F.Supp. 325, 338 (1973).13 Columbia Circuit reversed. 1278 (1974). agreed rejection jurisdictional contentions, merits founded permissible definition congressional intent APA reached, ruling APA's requirements. 14 writ certiorari 74-1110 review Appeals' Defendants filed cross-petition court's decision issues petition granted. petitions consolidated them. 421 975, 1974, 44 466 (1975). Since we deal contentions first, find unnecessary reach raised 74-1110, shall refer 15 argued certain embodied developed, parties whose liabilities affected. entire country's revenue system, limited evolution manifests vest exclusive authority administration laws duly authorized delegates, oversight appropriate committees Congress itself. third-party suits questioning accorded taxpayers transfer determination away entrusted courts.14 16 analogize discretion vested prosecutor when prosecute. invoke settled prosecutorial neither prosecuted nor prosecution. See 619, 1149, 541 (1973). Petitioners renew Act, 17 question party ever another, there statutory immunity bar ground sue.15 IV 18 No principle fundamental judiciary's proper role our system government constitutional federal-court jurisdiction actual cases controversies. Flast Cohen, 392 83, 95, 88 1942, 1950, 20 947, 958 (1968). concept part limitation. Unlike associated doctrines, example, restrains courts deciding political questions, "focuses get before wishes adjudicated." Id., 99, S.Ct., 1952, L.Ed.2d, 961. reiterated last Term, aspect "is 'alleged personal stake outcome controversy' warrant His invocation justify behalf." Seldin16, 498-499, 2205, 354 (1975) (emphasis original). sum, into issue decision. Absent showing, gratuitous inconsistent 19 702, gives right "adversely aggrieved agency statute."17 Data Processing Camp, 397 150, 90 827, 25 184 (1969), requirement section which, true, injured reviewed. Reduction threshold redressable broadening over previously thought minimum statute.18 But, emphasized 738, 1368, 636, 645 (1972), "broadening categories support different abandoning suffered injury." Richardson19, 418 166, 194, 94 2940, 2955, 41 678, 698 (1974) (Powell, J., concurring). necessity seeks stand profit interest remains requirement. ignore overstepping assigned adjudicating according tested sufficiency. note outset five goal. Our clear supra ; see supra. Insofar seek based special problems fail. allege indeed context representatives right. supra20, U.S., 511, 2211, 362. therefore turns injury, members. B 21 obvious sense, course, interest. alleges specific occasions due indigency,21 unavailable, practical matter, anywhere else. live communities assume, purpose analysis, service. But hands insufficient itself defendant. officials Department claims illegal desire adjudicate charged "Although law greatly changed (recent) steadfastly adhered that, absence statute expressly conferring resulting putatively assume jurisdiction." D.22, 617, 1148, 540. words, still results independent court. 22 here petitioners, indigents.23 implicit corollary requested relief, condition "discourage" follow denial Ruling, court-ordered return previous desire. specified instead regard implications. 23 equally desired availability So far sheds light, just plausible apply elect forgo avoid undetermined drain increase level uncompensated true alleged, information belief, donations deductible donors. inference them, so financially afforded receipt best.24 Solicitor General states brief nationwide, philanthropy accounts 4% Of revenues. introduced statement official association describing importance corporations. Such conflicting evidence supports commonsense proposition dependence vary hospital. Thus, further 24 Prior unadorned speculation suffice power. mother illegitimate child averred state-court criminal applying fathers legitimate children Equal Protection Clause Fourteenth Amendment. She injunction district attorney enforce father her child. lacked she "made secure payments nonenforcement, child's father, (the statute)." 618, 541. prospect prosecution jailing "only speculative." Ibid. Similarly, Term invalidation town's restrictive zoning ordinance show obtain adequate housing means, attributable factors. language directly applicable litigation, noted (defendants) controls case. Warth, indirectness while necessarily fatal "may substantially difficult III: To actions, harm." 505, 2208, 358. burden. Speculative inferences necessary connect actions petitioners.25 Moreover, suggests likelihood victory court, properly cognizant jurisdiction, require proceeding Accordingly, vacated, cause remanded instructions complaint. 27 ordered. 28 STEVENS took cases. 29 STEWART, concurring. 30 I join holding sue. add now imagine case, outside First Amendment area, where liability litigate someone BRENNAN, MARSHALL joins, concurring judgment. 32 agree litigation presently postured, met establishing reviewable between disputed Ruling. That is, my agreement dissent reasoning issue, unjustifiable clearly precedents. obfuscation particularly reasonable alternative grounds decide litigation. 33 seeking, Inter alia, declaration provisions promulgated free below-cost provided private, protected providing engaging activities. provision injuring "opportunity ability" doing illegally, derogation 34 However, Court, face applies narrow category characterized factual circumstances pertaining "Hospital A." indicate what hypothesis.1 most hotly contested portion ruling, modifying earlier "remov(ing) cost," best ambiguous regarding application effect respecting ripe illegally "encourages" All withdraw removing prerequisite status. oral argument,2 representation e record. facts way indicated specificity hospitals. apparently attempt clarify regard, as, clarification pursuant 555(e), see, g., Dunlop Bachowski, 560, 573, 1851, 1860-1861, 377, 389-390 (1975), petitioning revision 553(e), Cf., Oljato Chapter Navajo Tribe Train, 169 195, 207, 515 654, 666-667 means discovery informal request. withdraws "lack ripeness inhere(s) procedure, contingency serve(s) presented Court." Poe Ullman, 367 497, 528, 81 1752, 1769, 989, 1010 (1961) (Harlan, dissenting). Cf. Toilet Goods Assn. Gardner, 387 158, 163-164, 87 1520, 1524-1525, 697, 701-702 (1967).3 beyond Ruling) (its) raise(s) questions adjudicated general, 'concrete setting' determination." Gardner Assn., 167, 197, 1526, 1542, 704, 722 (1967) (opinion Fortas, J.). 36 Further, wished legality unambiguous aspects coming incumbent allege, stage offer conduct operations implicated terms showings demonstrate logical connection nexus wrongful harm complain, required, constitutional, controversy," affecting ensure "alleged assure adverseness sharpens presentation (C)ourt largely depends illumination questions." Baker Carr, 369 186, 204, 82 691, 703, 663, 678 (1962). 37 probably sufficient state respondents.4 event, later moved specifically arguing "(t)he injuries complained herein incurred defendants." App. 154. point create material indigents' Barlow Collins, 159, 175, n. 832, 842, 192, 204 (1970) Brennan, J.).5 made. There absolutely indication altered operation way, related entitled favor 38 today, wholly ignores foregoing Rather, assumes governmental Is encouraging provide fewer Ante, 42, 23. done pursuing prove "are upon" status, ante, 44, Rulings assumed "elect treatment," allegedly inducement "result services," 43. conclusion, abjures analysis policies heretofore inhere dimension doctrine, precedents Court.6 39 First, injury-in-fact unsupportable wrong complain economic signals responses affect respondents; very nature be, cognizable law, inducements light then, beneficial sufficiently if, readily assumes, interest, continue possess press 40 Clearly essence constitutionally mandated element meeting minimal justiciability. 678; supra, 164, 836, 198. Richardson, 196 18, 2956, 699 Nothing logic added today elected of" continuing continuous nature, additional determinative future conduct. Even given past consequences choice presumably re-evaluation future, circumstances, climate, expectations donor time. threat determinations "encouragement." often irrespective realization past. Doe Bolton, 179, 188, 739, 745, 201, 210 (1973); Epperson Arkansas, 393 97, 101-102, 89 266, 268-269, 228, 232-233 42 Indeed, substance concerns addressed Standing identifying rather ultimate immediacy task distinguishing "justiciable "difference dispute hypothetical character," Aetna Life Ins. Co. Haworth, 300 227, 240, 57 461, 464, L.Ed. 621 (1937), "necessarily degree." Maryland Cas. Pacific Coal & Oil Co., 312 270, 273, 61 510, 512, 85 826, 829 (1941); Golden Zwickler, 394 103, 108, 956, 959, 113, 118 (1969). 43 "(I)t difficult, possible, fashion precise test determining every controversy. Basically, controversy, having adverse interests, reality judgment." If, demonstrated doubt standard met. conclude: "(T)he activity contingent, brooding presence, casts well (responding) parties. 46 "Where imminence adversely affects parties, judgments parties' rights interests." Super Tire Engineering McCorkle, 416 115, 122, 125, 1694, 1698, 1699, 8, 47 Second, conflicts decisions. administrative Act. Hence, governing developed (1970); 192 636 (1972); SCRAP, 412 669, 2407, 254 Hardin Utilities 390 651, 787 Any prudential, nonconstitutional considerations underlay disposition U.S.7, 536 (1973), Seldin,8 343 inapposite congressionally enacted review. "the allocation national (and) shift democratic form government." 2952, 694 concurring), ameliorated, prudential limitations remain supposedly subsumed "zone interests" supra.9 concerning sue conclusively demanded identified "personal assure" adverseness. 732-733, 1364-1365, 641-642; 151-152, 829, 187-188. True, personally suffer avoided, Club, 740, 646. here, demonstrating adequately served pleading putting direct outcome." attempting "vindicate value preferences process." Albert, Supra, 485-489. If made, real recognizable tangible circumstances. 254; 636; cf. supra10, 163, 835, 197. " 'distinctive discriminating' harm," 172 5, 841, 203 J.), "particularized (setting respondents) man street." 49 plain accomplished fact. Nor ultimately complaining incentives action. obviously much "direct perceptible" "line causation" less "attenuated" 688, 2416, 270. 50 Certainly attempted distinction SCRAP "wash." "although indirect 'the asked (an) attenuated line causation,' nevertheless perceptible harm' flowing action." 25. instant different, says, "fails traced" impossible meaningfully differentiate sets pleadings. Compare 13-25 8-12, 72-562, O. T. 1972, Aberdeen Rockfish SCRAP. complains "whether disputed) unalleged unknown about hospitals." precisely same allegations; there, response keeping modern notions civil procedure. 689-690, 15, 2417, 270-271. 51 pleadings, why "unalleged hospitals" all. notes, 23, inferred Some maximum being exactly offset conferred. withdrawing incentive certainly 52 wonder armed "fatally pleadings" tool, strike next. pick examples, Will minority schoolchildren plead segregated schools, schools forgo" availability" complainants integrated educational system? Green Kennedy, 309 1127 (DC1970), reported Sub nom. Connally, 330 1150, summarily aff'd Coit Green, 404 997, 564, 550 (1971).11 Or black Americans encouragement, institutions denied? See.McGlotten Connal, 448 (DC1972); Pitts Wisconsin Dept. Revenue, 333 662 (E.D.Wis.1971). perusal reveals, lower proofs somehow C 53 disturbing today's insistence resting squarely irreducible effectively placing rectify. chooses legislate setting up scheme frustrates objective denied, complainant almost showing. Legislative Branch supply requires. More indications confer germane, requirement, branch lore assiduously avoids reaching. 19.12 54 modern-day society, dominated complex large-scale involvement everyday lives us, essential protection harmed action, 111, 1958, 968 (Douglas, attainment goals frustrated 173-175, 9, 841-842, 203-204 83 Yale L.J., 451-456. dissenting creation confuses reviewability merits, said: 55 "(I)n view reviewability, pose distinct governed considerations. isolate treat independently two, risk obscuring uninformed, poorly reasoned injustice. Too merged confused inquiry, lumped rubric 'standing.' books opinions 'standing' dismissal, all, actually rested existence legally claimed, instance." 176, 843, 205.13 56 Today, achieves worse manipulation stretching conception bounds usefully measures "particularization" threatens "become catchall unarticulated Court" insist "decline adjudicate" prefers hear. 530, 1770, 1012 Section 501 linchpin system. Subsection subsection "shall subtitle Among (c)(3) corporations religious, Charitable, scientific, testing safety, literary, purposes, prevention cruelty animals." (Emphasis added.) Deduction taxpayer contribution allowed §§ 170(a), (c)(2). Other similar derives 642(c), 2055(a)(2), 2106(a)(2)(A)(ii), 2522(a)(2) (b)(2). 1956-1 Cum.Bull. 202. 1969-2 117. pronouncement approximately month earlier. Technical Info.Rel. 1022 (Oct. 1969). descriptions fit, whole part, field office advice. anonymous reference conformed deleting "identifying details confidential information" contained requests, dealt privately underlying published xxii. conclusion cited trusts premise promotion large said whole. Restatement (Second) Trusts 368, 372 (1959); Scott, Law (3d ed. 1967). concluded maintaining open pay, enough charitable. California Organization. Organization; National Tenants Association Disabled Miners Widows, Inc.; Health, Education, Advisory Team, Inc. One 12, minor, parents, named plaintiffs. 533(b) "(e)xcept notice statute, (A) interpretative rules amounted abuse process law. These below, pressed declarations Medicaid. enjoin suspend charitable-organization of, refrain to, submit proof, approved Medicaid deposits collect, once rendered. collection taxes "due owing" "illegal" extension "(N)o restraining assessment maintained person, assessed." 7421(a). "In Except taxes, States, pleading, declare relations interested declaration, sought." 2201 added). entered enjoined hospital, deductions it, satisfied posted areas court-approved reciting rely Louisiana McAdoo, 234 627, 938, 58 1506 (1914) position. State Louisiana, producer sugar, challenging tariff sugar imported Cuba. ordered dismissed. statements maintenance "would disturb Government," "(i)nterference (by courts) interfere ordinary functions 632, 633, 940, 941, L.Ed., 1509. disposition, express McAdoo kind noted, 34-35, arguments, ruled affidavits submitted supported relative going proceeded stage. 501-502, 2206-2207, 356-357 focus serves separate function bearing process. (1962), significant "A thereof." 702. Kansas City Power Light McKay, 281, 225 924, 932 (1955). 733, 1365, 642 (1972). second, plaintiff, regardless absolute, "arguably zone regulated" framework arises. 153, 830, 188. earlier, they, course particular consider test. maintain adds nothing represent "must injured, other, belong purport represent." 502, 2207, 357. complains, service, knowledge variation change analysis. "a standing" Congress' invasion standing. 617 540; Trafficante Metropolitan 409 205, 364, 415 acted, remain: palpable himself, shared possible litigants." 501, 2206, 356. 732 641. Appeals, sustaining policy, Emergency Much argument, Amici, directed conclusion. question. averment IRS's encourages policy. note, entirely assured ability," duty. 30. maintain, consistently refusing number accepted, applicant admitted, depend admittance sought. reveals tomembers 40-41. erroneously believed causation," harm" 689, withstood survived 15. survive fails 40-43. missing link. stated: caused him otherwise." 152, 187. traceable defendant official, injurious competition Accord, Arnold Tours, 400 45, 91 179 Investment Institute 401 620-621, 1091, 1093-1094, 367, 372-373 (1971). Processing's companion (1970), extortionate demands landlord official. 162-163, 835-836, 197-198. occurred challenge; Cum. Bull. 117, provides pertinent part: "Advice 1954. "Situation 1. 250-bed Its board trustees prominent citizens community. Medical staff privileges qualified physicians size 150 doctors active 200 courtesy staff. owns building premises space 60 doctors. privilege leasing space. Rents comparable commercial buildings area. patients. usually ends year excess receipts disbursements operations. Excess funds generally expansion replacement existing facilities equipment, amortization indebtedness, improvement patient care, training, education, research. "To organized furtherance accepted term, operated, indirectly, interests. charity, purpose. (Second), Trusts, sec. 368 372; Scott (3rd 1967), 372. may, therefore, meets 501(a). "Since research activities community, term. health, like advancement education religion, deemed eligible include small comment 372, comments (c); 372.2. thereof reimbursement, broad annual surplus preclude exemptions. using quality expand facilities, programs, purposes. "Accordingly, "Even considers scope Situation file Form 1023, Exemption Application, recognized C.B. 1956-1, 202 forth cost. "Now, demonstrates (perusing) polar situations, 2, dealing B. variety trustees, privileges, activities, maintains full-time room, contrary, proprietary it's owned doctors, limit people know, comprise committee keep physicians, cetera, basically examples designed educate administrators clear-cut situations. situation, you exemption, but, can't You got yourself Service. "If example doesn't seem benefit, seems run pretty strictly inurement owner-doctors. thing emphasize begin hundreds gradations moment give scale, let's say dropped completely for, say, engaged treating cancer disease. Under superfluous rarely room. Or, consortium together 'We nursing school, ' Tr. Oral Arg. 23-25. integral component "final" 704. Abbott Laboratories 136, 149, 1507, 1515, 681, 691 (1967). With controvert For program, cash admission. appear refute came basis. or, fairness wrongs went Ruling; operations, fall us certiorari. "interested persons," 553(c). created participation deprivation L.E.2d participate, availed presented. Therefore, procedural raised, 'line 25, intricately elaborated continues recent "reverting long abjured courts." 2220, (Brennan, waits vain explanation selectively imposed requirement; odds usual Rules Civil dismissed entitle Conley Gibson, 355 41, 45-46, 78 102, 80, 84 (1957). want striking reaffirmation Bldg. Trustees Rex Hospital, 425 746, 1848, (1976), observation therein sufficiency subject-matter 742 343. originally told 540, 541, consequent dismissal owing nexus" "unique statute," prosecutions system." Although arguable context, 621, 542 (White, dissenting), Term's taught raising "unique" after whatever cases, distressing mechanically approach 37-39, Constitutional outcome. 181, 2948, 690 read "person comes statutes authorizing ("within statute"). 642; Challenge Action: Inadequate Surrogate Claim Relief, L.J. 425, 451-452 105 view, go 168-170, 171 838-839, 840, 200-201, 202, probabilistic immediate 689 14, argument "significant" alleged. fulfilled indeed. difference larger magnitude discounted probability nonoccurrence. frivolous, hastened 175 J.); 2416 271. See, Granite Falls Bank Schneider, 319 1346 (W.D.Wash.1970), aff'd, 402 1006, 2187, 428 Obviously, occurrence affirmed appeal. Jurisdictional Statement 71-425, 1971. F.Supp., 1132. drive home statement, 22: 'a standing' litigants.' Davis, Liberalized Standing, U.Chi.L.Rev. 450, 469 (1970). After understandably lament intellectual confusion Scanwell Shaffer, 137 371, 373, 424 859, 861 (1970): Supreme become area incredible complexity. written retrospective satisfaction guidance. 'complicated specialty jurisdiction.' help asking true."

Category: 8