Fausett v. Walgreens
Supreme Court of Illinois
- Home
- Retail Litigation Center
- Fausett v. Walgreens
BRIEF FILED
Fausett v. Walgreens
Court: Supreme Court of Illinois
Date: December 6, 2023
Issue on Appeal: Whether no-injury plaintiffs have standing to bring a FACTA claim in state court.
RLC’s Position: The United States Supreme Court held in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez that allowing private plaintiffs who had not suffered any injuries to advance claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) violated the U.S. Constitution on two grounds: Article III standing and Article II separation of powers. Article II delegates the authority to enforce the laws to the Executive Branch. Allowing private parties who have not suffered any harm to selectively bring enforcement actions would impede upon the Executive Branch’s authority. The U.S. Supreme Court’s Article II holding applies to Fausett and makes clear that allowing individuals who have suffered no injuries to bring a FACTA claim is unconstitutional.
Other Amici Joining RLC’s brief: Illinois Retail Merchants Association
Counsel: Adam Unikowsky at Jenner & Block
Tags: Standing, Article II, FACTA
Please use the DOWNLOAD button below to access the RLC's Brief.
Fausett v. Walgreens
Court: Supreme Court of Illinois
Date: December 6, 2023
Issue on Appeal: Whether no-injury plaintiffs have standing to bring a FACTA claim in state court.
RLC’s Position: The United States Supreme Court held in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez that allowing private plaintiffs who had not suffered any injuries to advance claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) violated the U.S. Constitution on two grounds: Article III standing and Article II separation of powers. Article II delegates the authority to enforce the laws to the Executive Branch. Allowing private parties who have not suffered any harm to selectively bring enforcement actions would impede upon the Executive Branch’s authority. The U.S. Supreme Court’s Article II holding applies to Fausett and makes clear that allowing individuals who have suffered no injuries to bring a FACTA claim is unconstitutional.
Other Amici Joining RLC’s brief: Illinois Retail Merchants Association
Counsel: Adam Unikowsky at Jenner & Block
Tags: Standing, Article II, FACTA
Please use the DOWNLOAD button below to access the RLC's Brief.
Latest Retail Litigation Center Insights
Blog Post
RLC Board Directors & Guest RLC CLOs Sworn into SCOTUS Bar
- 04/17/2024
Press Release
Retailers Ask SCOTUS: Overturn Harmful 9th Circuit Decision
- By [Deborah White]
- 03/05/2024
Blog Post
Multi-Year PAGA Trials: What’s a Court to Do?
- By [Larissa Whittingham]
- 12/15/2023
Press Release
Retail Litigation Center Adds New Litigation Counsel
- By [Deborah White, Larissa Whittingham]
- 10/02/2023
Press Release
Court of International Trade Erred in China 301 Tariff Case
- By [Kathleen McGuigan]
- 07/25/2023
Blog Post
Plaintiffs’ Bar Takes Another Bite at the TRE Apple
- 06/30/2023