Chiles v. Salazar · ¶23

Under these circumstances, the courts held, Ms. Chiles faced an “ongoing injury resulting from the statute's chilling effect” on her speech. 116 F. 4th, at 1195 (internal quotation marks omitted); see App. 140a–141a. Satisfied as well that Ms. Chiles's injury was traceable to Colorado's law and redressable by an as-applied constitutional ruling in her favor, both courts held that she possessed Article III standing to bring suit. 116 F. 4th, at 1194, 1199; App. 145a, n. 5. In coming to this conclusion, the lower courts joined others that have found standing in similar cases involving similar statutes. See, e. g., Tingley v. Ferguson, 47 F. 4th 1055, 1066 (CA9 2022); Catholic Charities of Jackson, Lenawee and Hillsdale Ctys. v. Whitmer, 162 F. 4th 686, 691 (CA6 2025).

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.