Trump v. California · ¶90

The majority’s reliance on Clapper is likewise misplaced. The no-standing determination in that case involved attorneys who were not directly targeted, had no statutory duties requiring them to act, and were perceived by this Court to be attempting to “manufacture standing merely by inflicting harm on themselves.” 568 U. S., at 410–416. Here, the opposite is true. The rule changes the President has ordered federal authorities to make target state election officials. See 91 Fed. Reg. 17125 (requiring federal officials to “transmit to the chief election official of each State” the Citizenship Lists); id., at 17126 (requiring the Attorney General to “prioritize the investigation and, as appropriate, the prosecution of State and local officials”). And the Plaintiff States have not manufactured the complained-of harms; “[they] have no practical choice but to respond to the [Order] now.” ＿＿＿…

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