Document: 490 U.S. 605 109 S.Ct. 2037 104 L.Ed.2d 696 ASARCO INCORPORATED, et al., Petitionersv.Frank KADISH, ux., al. No. 87-1661. Argued Feb. 27, 1989. Decided May 30, Syllabus Among other things, the New Mexico-Arizona Enabling Act of 1910 granted Arizona certain lands, excluding mineral in trust for support public schools, and, § 28, provided that lands cannot be sold or leased except upon compliance with conditions regarding advertising, bidding, and appraisal. incorporated these into Article 10 its Constitution. After this Court held original land exclusion inapplicable to not known at time grant, Wyoming v. United States, 255 489, 41 393, 65 L.Ed. 742 (1921), Congress passed Jones 1927, extending terms grant encompass all lands. The was also amended 1936 1951 clarify procedures leasing specific purposes. latter amendment expressly extinguished 28 restrictions on leases development hydrocarbon substances. Arizona's own law governing state does require advertised, appraised, their full appraised value. Ariz.Rev.Stat.Ann. 27-234(B). Respondents, individual taxpayers a teachers association, brought state-court suit against State Land Department others, seeking declaration 27-234(B) is void ground it comply provisions Constitution requesting appropriate injunctive relief. Petitioners, lessees school intervened as defendants. trial court upheld statute. Supreme reversed, ruling "unconstitutional invalid pertains nonhydrocarbon leases," remanded case court, inter alia, enter judgment declaring consider what further relief might appropriate. Held: affirmed. 155 Ariz. 484, 747 P.2d 1183, Justice KENNEDY delivered opinion respect Parts I, II-A, II-B-2, II-C, III, IV, concluding that: 1 1. This has jurisdiction review decision below. Pp. 610-612, 617-633. 2 (a) issued final within meaning U.S.C. 1257, despite fact determine On remand, have before any federal question whether past current are valid, since respondents, appeal, withdrew request an accounting payment sums due under leases. In addition, court's actions affect Court's 27- 34(B) invalid. Thus, below comes two exceptions finality requirement set out Cox Broadcasting Corp. Cohn, 420 469, 479, 480, 95 1029, 1039, 43 328 (1975): (1) issue conclusive outcome proceedings preordained, (2) questions could come been adjudicated by remaining issues will give rise question. 611-612. 3 (b) When interpreting which plaintiffs action lacked standing sue principles courts, may exercise certiorari if causes direct, specific, concrete injury parties who petition review, long requisites III controversy met. Here, petitioners possess invoke federal-court authority, they alleged poses serious immediate threat leases' continuing validity, such can traced erroneous interpretation statutes, redressed favorable Court. Moreover, met, remain adverse, altered tangible legal rights. It would inappropriate vacate respondents when initially, remand proceedings, course render nugatory effect imposing requirements courts whenever adjudicate issues, whereas established traditions decisions recognize bound yet both power proper role binding judgments federal-law subject only simply order dismissal, leaving free bring declaratory raising same claims, disposition likely defeat normal preclusive effects conclusions about were review. Such represent unnecessary partial inroad Rooker-Feldman doctrine's construction 1257 barring direct lower reached highest District Columbia Appeals Feldman, 460 462, 103 1303, 75 206 (1983); Rooker Fidelity Trust Co., 263 413, 44 149, 68 362 (1923), particularly already presented justiciable standards. 617-624. 4 (c) based adequate independent Although mentioned several times directed declare "unconstitutional," discussion focused solely statutes without ever mentioning apart from Act. explicitly considered itself adopt plaintiffs' construction, described "rescript" opinion's references merely reflect holding rests law, do divorce constitutional questions. 624-625. 5 2. Section nonhydroca bon leases, sale lease must substantially conform mandatory 625-633. 6 conditioned, statute's clear express language, selling those Petitioners' reliance Neel Barker, 27 N.M. 605, 204 P. 205 (1922), proposition originally exempt Act's apply later determined nature, flawed respects. First, did take account supra, unknown grant. Second, regarded unburdened conditions. 627-628. 7 To read 1(a) language declares thereunder "shall prior grants" nonmineral lands—as assuring title vested manner validity titles redundant, statute subsequently directly addresses vesting titles. Instead, achieved Congress' objective confirming States. Similarly, 1(b)—which states though sold, rights mine remove minerals themselves "as legislature direct"—is blanket authority States whatever wish proceeds go schools. Rather, authorizes regulate methods made specify necessary desirable additional terms, dispositional requirements. 628-631. 8 amendments confirm never removed contained amendments, reiterated formulation purposes "may direct" prescribe." alter application "all lands," amendment, because but tends force 631-633. 9 KENNEDY, joined THE CHIEF JUSTICE, STEVENS, SCALIA, concluded Part II-B-1 dismissed outset standing-to-sue rules apply, neither respondent nor plaintiffs, satisfied bringing court. Respondent taxpayers' assertion "deprived funds millions dollars thereby resulting unnecessarily higher taxes," association's allegations section "imposes adverse economic impact" members special interest quality education State, assert kind particular, personal confer courts. 612-617. BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, agreeing had irrelevant defendants courts' reach standin 633-634. 11 J., announced participating Members joined, JJ., II-B-1, REHNQUIST, C.J., STEVENS joined. filed concurring part judgment, post, p. 633. dissenting part, 634. O'CONNOR, took no consideration case. 12 Daniel M. Gribbon, Washington, D.C., petitioners. 13 David S. Baron respondents. 14 Christopher J. Wright, U.S., amicus curiae leave 15 Court, II-B-1. 16 ultimate our laws Arizona. however, there difficult jurisdiction, matter touches essential aspects relation between 17 * Various Education Association, represents approximately 20,000 schoolteachers throughout (Supp.1988), void, challenged required follow sell 1910, 36 Stat. 557, repeated others. permitted intervene Eventually certified defendant class Rule Civil Procedure 23. consisted present future 18 cross-motions summary (the plaintiffs) appealed. reversed over dissent one justice, leases." Kadish Dept., 498, 1197 (1987). instructions invalid, relief, any, 19 certiorari, we 488 887, 217, 102 208 (1988). II 20 Before undertake legislation authorizing valid rule amici raise three jurisdictional each substance. We required, course, matters initiative necessary, legitimate judicial confined here are: first, final; second, actual permits court; third, unreviewable ground. A. 21 first then "just appropriate." Ariz., P.2d, 1197. amicus, asserts existing remains decide uphold "true value," thus "substantial conformity" Act, 574-575, even every Brief Amicus Curiae 10-14 (hereafter States). 22 If correct, lack But correct. Respondents sought injunction leases; last appeal See Appellant CV-86-0238-T, 6, n. 3, 40. And, Accordingly, (1975). Here "the conclusive" preordained." Id., S.Ct., 1038; see Duquesne Light Co. Barasch, 299, 609, 646 (1989). " 'federal court,' contrary States' suggestion, Cox, 1038, quoting Radio Station WOW, Inc. Johnson, 326 120, 127, 1475, 1480, 89 2092 (1945). B 23 second some theoretical import, infrequent occurrence. whether, standards, nonjusticiable sue; so, examine justiciability stage heard proceeded seek now 24 contends should standing, outset. "In essence litigant entitled merits dispute particular issues." Warth Seldin, 422 490, 2197, 2205, 45 343 outer dimensions prudential concept shaped sound policy control Congress, core becomes question; most basic aspect controlling elements definition III. Valley Forge Christian College Americans Separation Church & Inc., 454 464, 471-476, 752, 757-761, 70 700 (1982); id., 490-494, 768-770 (BRENNAN, dissenting). level resolved applying well-settled law. 25 citizens sufficient stake challenge general where distinct suffered covers old familiar As ordinary matter, suits premised taxpayer status cognizable taxpayer's "interest moneys Treasury . shared comparatively minute indeterminable; taxation, payments funds, so remote, fluctuating uncertain, basis afforded [judicial intervention]." Frothingham Mellon, 262 447, 487, 597, 601, 67 1078 (1923) (decided Massachusetts Mellon ). 26 indicated conclusion hold municipal taxpayers, shown "peculiar corporate [municipal] corporation" makes revenues "direct immediate." Frothingham, 486-487, 600-601, citing Crampton Zabriskie, 101 1070 (1880). Yet likened refused absent showing injury," pecuniary otherwise. Doremus Board Hawthorne, 342 429, 434, 72 394, 397, 96 475 (1952). No case, allege circumstances them. asserted taxes." Complaint ¶ Even pure speculation lawsuit result tax prevail, conceivable more money devoted education; financed fund, Tr. Oral Arg. 8-10, reduce supplement provide programs. possibility receive "remote, uncertain," stated consequently claimed "likely decision," Forge, 472, 758. flaw defeats claim association contend IV. invalidation create increased revenue near future, much disputed here, harm rest hypothetical assumptions claims. prevailed available, maybe taxes reduced, sources available schools unchanged. devote increase teacher salaries benefits. These different ways officials, depending perceptions wise fiscal myriad circumstances. Whether claims depends unfettered choices actors whose broad discretion presume either predict. less confidence than cases like Allen 468 737, 3315, 82 556 (1984), Simon Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization, 426 26, 1917, 48 450 (1976), found lacking probable response private individuals explicit incentives judged too uncertain satisfy redressability prong 29 Petitioners argue "likelihood" redressable once recognized contingencies. implication cumulate probabilities, event receiving indirect benefit funding Reply 14-15. line reasoning evokes responses. avoid fundamental problem unable evaluate assurance way policymaking officials acting discretion. doctrine gaming device surmounted aggregating kinds whom remote speculative taken themselves. inquiry, party Warth, 498-499, 2204-2205, alleges fairly traceable conduct requested 759. 30 put side, something contention undermines Arizona." say certainty raised moreover, generalized grievances concerned consistently Los Angeles Lyons, 461 95, 111-112, 1660, 1670-1671, 675 482-487, 763-766; Sierra Club Morton, 405 727, 736-740, 92 1361, 1367-1369, 31 636 (1972); Schlesinger Reservists Comm. Stop War, 418 208, 94 2925, 706 (1974); Richardson, 166, 2940, 678 (1974). Our precedents demonstrate establish noneconomic injury, see, e.g., Gladstone, Realtors Village Bellwood, 441 91, 99 1601, 60 66 (1979); Trafficante Metropolitan Life Ins. 409 205, 93 364, 34 415 purely abstract, understood lead psychological consequence presumably produced observation disagrees," U. ., 485, 765, Arizona, alone standing. Cf. Club, 739-740, 1368-1369. argument succeed distinguishing regard students, parents, various citizens. 32 discloses find articulated precedents. follows apply. 33 judiciary chose path, right, letting That properly allocation system. often constraints accordingly limitations address called interpret or, See, Pennell San Jose, 485 1, 8, 108 849, 855-856, (1988); 113, 1671; Doremus, 397; Secretary Md. J.H. Munson 467 947, 971, 2839, 2854, 81 786 (1984) (STEVENS, concurring); Bateman 429 1302, 1305, 97 50 (1976) (REHNQUIST, chambers); cf. Highland Farms Dairy, Agnew, 300 608, 612, 57 549, 551, 835 (1937). adhere requirements, provision exclusive interpretations 1738; Grubb Public Utilities Comm'n Ohio, 281 470, 374, 74 972 (1930). Indeed, inferior exist Supremacy Clause Judges shall bound" Const., Art. VI, cl. 35 arises rendered At juncture, stemming decree, decree insist that, definite shape defined obligation, them injury. agree. commence complaint, attempting power. Instead petitioners, losing below, entry lawsuit. presents resolution here. 37 invalidated. undisputed reviewed eases virtue improper ended adjudication constitutes Nashville, C. St. L. R. Wallace, 288 249, 261-265, 53 345, 347-349, 77 730 (1933). faced "actual threatened injury" sufficiently "distinct palpable" 500, 501, 2206. 38 us statutes. They secured along flow ruling, agree reversal disabling circumstances, conclude meet invoking "personally ha[ve] putatively illegal [other party] 'fairly action' 'is decision.' 758 (citations omitted). petitioners' affected identified cases. 474-475, 759-760. appears points. 20, ("[I]n light [petitioners] standing" court). 39 record shows existence genuine Court." Tileston Ullman, 318 44, 46, 63 493, 494, 87 603 (1943). "valuable substantial degree law." 262, 347. confronted, certainly, "attempting secure abstract determination advising facts," ibid., example, advisory through mechanisms obtaining official. resulted altering proceeding controversy. re Summers, 325 561, 568-569, 1307, 1312, 1795 40 insufficient jurisdiction. Government suggests "to court" 14. counter finds merits, 13-15, done least occasions moot while pending DeFunis Odegaard, 416 312, 320, 1704, 1708, 164 Neither entire impose parties. result, recognizing 42 doubt unacceptable paradox interfere State's sovereign vacating authority. committed writ announce instance.1 dismiss undisturbed, problems ensue. normally binds separately occasionally cautioned well bind 397 ("[W]e accept procedure constitute" controversy); Minnesota National Tea 309 676, 679, 84 920 (1940) (this responsible "that arbiters i portant constitution"); Nat. Bank Kansas City Swope, 274 123, 130-131, 47 511, 513-514, 71 959 (1927) (proceeding res judicata asserted, proceeding, eventually here"). predominant promoted apparent exception preclusion doctrines assure uniform ultimately Richardson Ramirez, 24, 42, 13, 2655, 2665, 551 (1974) "any permit resort, quite intention enacting invalidate grounds adversely Court"). Given likelihood dismissal again denigrate creating peculiar anomaly channels appellate interprets ordinarily Atlantic Coast Line Locomotive Engineers, 398 281, 296, 90 1739, 1748, 234 (1970); 415-416, 150, (1923). urges readjudicate very action, essence, attempt obtain 1257. For reasons, believe stage.2 cost disrespect judgments. new vindicate right 262-263, 347-348 (a modified appellant courts"). following rationale point: 46 unmindful (plaintiffs below) prevail succeeded unavailable initially Nonetheless, although "often turns nature source asserted," "in [claim]." deference petitioning forum redress real therefore Forge. Because bar having merits. C threshold procedural concerns rested Fox Film Muller, 296 207, 210, 56 183, 184, 80 158 (1935). otherwise relied exclusively including extended applicable legislative histories. 1185-1186. conclusion, A.R.S. 27-234 unconstitutional 49 Its focuses "bound advanced [plaintiffs]" 495-496, 1194-1195. description, ground, Enterprise Irrigation Dist. Canal 243 157, 164, 318, 321, 61 644 (1917); 495, 1194 ("The 'fundamental paramount law' Arizona," Murphy 338, 181 336, 340 (1947)). sum, 51 meeting imposed begin detailed 52 authorized people Territories form governments. provisions, township provided, 574-575. Under conditions, bidder auction notice advertisements newspapers weekly weeks. Leases term five years advertising requirement. Lands values appraisal All derived permanent segregated interest, principal, spent proposed constitution, 10, admitted Union 1912. specifically excluded §§ 561-562, 572, gave uncertainty "unknown" discovered until after subsequent decisions, applied 500-501, 396, (1921); Sweet, 245 563, 572-573, 193, 195, 62 473 (1918). holdings turn spawned numerous disputes Federal Government. Work Braffet, 276 560, 561-563, 363, (1928). Title many Western doubt, became prove passed. 1927 1026, brief well. twice, June 5, 1936, ch. 517, 1477; 2, 1951, 51. 54 enacted 1941, requires "provide lessee royalty per cent net value claim." (Supp.1988). advertised itself, o 55 specified hereby said trust, disposed whole herein natural products trusts producing same." 574, 575 (emphasis added). "Disposition thing indirectly therefrom, deemed breach trust." Any "null void" unless "made conformity Act." Ibid. again, forth "[a]ll leaseholds, timber, land." cite exempted nature. proposition, tested decided year discussed Neel, Congress. consequence, Mexico erred "Congress intend controlled restricted act purposes." N.M., 611, P., 207. conditions.3 enactment associated dual regime, depend H.R.Rep. 1761, 69th Cong., 2d Sess., 2-3 (1927); S.Rep. 603, 1st 1-6 (1926). formal was: "An Confirming aid common schools." 1026. regime "extend[ing]" grants embrace numbered sections character." non-mineral sections." 1(a), 1026 58 make points prop r reading "same effect" intended nothing granted. 1(b) deposits newly "by direct," rentals royalties therefrom utilized 1026-1027. According therefore, Act; contrary, repudiated 59 suggested redundant: continues immediately clause "vest[ing]" "titles meaning, "[c]onfirming" undermine coverage says reserved leased. undertaken direct." containing sole passage set, suffers defects. with, offer comprehensive understanding statutory regime. contains State. extend all, reserved. inconsistent view trust. contend, allow little royalty, room abuses establishment designed prevent. Perhaps defect urged largely perpetuate eliminate interpretation, continue involved proper, others improper, critical difference determination, point, 1910. surely statute, sensible n appealing one.4 preceding 1(b), thought emphasize novel limitations; instead, retained given conditional viewed desirable, 491, 1190. dispense restrictions.5 64 Both sides place great deal emphasis occurred 1951. think decisive best illustrative how not, instance, later, met vested, upsetting settled expectations belated effort onerous. relax previously, suggest so. wholly consistent previously conditions.6 1477, prescribe," 52. former land," remained followed language. And adopted here: "for exploration, development, production oil, gas, substances," 52, purposes, Thus history extent indicates anything significance, confirms undiminished force. IV "The concern integrity [Enabling Act] evident." Alamo Cattle 424 295, 302, 910, 915, (1976). correct (Supp.1988) Affirmed. O'CONNOR 69 BLACKMUN join, judgment. I join opinion. disagree expressed KENNEDY's issue. holds II-B-2 unnecessary. Chief SCALIA joins, part. opinion, failed show sort "injury fact" Ante, "tends resolved, rarified atmosphere debating society, factual context conducive realistic appreciation consequences action." 758, (1982). me, absence disposes appeal. 73 good lost claim, one-sided necessari y mean wrong, persuasive justification—a provides justifies reaches saying "injury" supplies difficulty explanation petitioners—mineral below—have always able position "injure" sense. statecourt far concerned, threaten injure operation enforcement plaintiffs-respondents. obviously cured defect. One could, analogize commencement phase lawsuit, purpose plaintiff filing district court: litigation. Certainly mootness Munsingwear, 36, 104, (1950), indicate entered longer parties, vacation condition inevitably condition. 76 'the controversy,' ante, 619, "[t]hese adverse. ." limiting "adverse" "genuine controversy" lay sense terms. (1975); supra; Linda R.S. Richard D., 410 614, 1146, 536 (1973). emphatically another vigorously contended decided. trumped up, "friendly suits." shortcoming failure governmental grounds. society"; grievance prohibited really applies sauce goose gander important true, rather unremarkable proposition. Some Mass. LXXXV (amending provide: "Each branch legislature, governor council, autho ity opinions justices supreme solemn occasions"); Mich. ("Either house constitutionality effective date"). governance better off worse off. none reviewable reason fear landscape opportunity Therefore why bend jurisprudence imaginary problem. treatment become illuminating point. situation, entirely "vacate direction dismiss." 39, 106, (1950). predicated "supervisory courts," "is one." 40, 107. judgments, made. Traditionally, moot, vacated deem appropriate, (1974), dispose variety ways, reinstatement More recently, regular practice situation evinces recognition live controversy, disturb Gas Elec. Kan., 481 1044, 107 2171, 829 (1987); Times-Picayune Pub. Schulingkamp, 985, 1417, 667 None cited found, squarely Joseph H. defend declared began evaluating obviated inquiry. 954-959, 2845-2848. true Revere General Hospital, 463 239, 2979, (1983), limitation jus tertii, "leaving intact favor [the plaintiff], purportedly representative third party's rights." 243, 2982. (1952), dismissed, instance 432-435, 396-398. injured possible distinction appraise, helpful setting. ago valuation condemnation difficulties making appraisals complete accuracy, "market value" rights, suffice depart imposes transactions. Montana Warren, 137 348, 352-353, 96, 97, 681 (1890). adopt, still traces minimized. argued prospect for, mine, remove" cannot, prohibition limited need fair necessary. wake experience instructive contemporaneous Concerned undermined government petitioned authorize plebiscite codify response, joint effect. Joint Resolution 7, 58. waive appraisal, bidding conspicuously itself. Lassen Highway 385 458, 584, 515 (1967), bearing Lassen, obliged condemned use highway program, seeing "no transfers prevent occur, fashion assured compensation." 587. Unlike sales precisely transactions addressed bid.

Category: 8