Trump v. California · ¶78

The Court’s suggestion that these realities do not matter for standing purposes because the Order constitutes a mere “internal directive,” ante, at 2, is both factually wrong and legally irrelevant. The Order explicitly directs federal officials to transmit the Citizenship Lists to the States, who are then threatened with prosecution if they fail to use those lists. And the legal test for justiciable harm is not whether the injury was caused by an outward-facing order as opposed to an “internal” one. Instead, the relevant inquiry is whether a plaintiff has been, or will imminently be, injured by the directive they seek to challenge. See Lujan, 504 U. S., at 560–561.

slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.