Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2-2016
Abstract
Two decades after Justice Douglas coined “injury in fact” as the token of admission to federal court under Article III, Justice Scalia sealed it into the constitutional canon in Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife. In the two decades since Lujan, Justice Scalia has thrown increasingly pointed barbs at the permissive standing doctrine of the Warren Court, maintaining it is founded on impermissible recognition of “Psychic Injury.” Justice Scalia and his acolytes take the position that Article III requires a tough minded, common sense and practical approach. Injuries in fact must be "tangible" "direct" "concrete" "de facto" realities in time and space free from spooky entities like "Psychic Injury."
Albert Einstein famously took the position that quantum mechanics could not be a proper and complete theory on the ground that "[P]hysics should represent a reality in time and space, free from spooky actions at a distance." The problem that ultimately overtook Einstein’s argument was that experimental results vindicating quantum mechanics stubbornly continued to appear in the journals. The burden of this paper is to demonstrate that spooky "injuries in fact" involving information have stubbornly continued to appear in United States Reports. It demonstrates that the Court has regularly adjudicated the controversies of the information age: disputes regarding illicit acquisition of information, denial of access to information, improper exposure to information and intellectual property. And it argues that the Court will continue to do so.
These adjudications fatally undermine an account of Article III that insists on "direct" "tangible" and "palpable" injuries to physical or economic interests as the price of admission to the federal courthouse, and profoundly alter notions of "particularized" and "imminent" injury. Information is by nature intangible, and information plays an increasingly dominant role in our social, economic, political and cultural life. Information is largely non-rivalrous and non-excludable. Violations of duties regarding information thus regularly result in injuries that are "general" rather than “particularized.” And, with the advent of the Internet, informational harm is pandemically "imminent": information can be spookily and instantaneously "present" at opposite ends of the country, or of the globe.
Keywords
Constitutional law, civil procedure, standing to sue, justiciability, Scalia, information litigation, informational injury, cases and controversies, Article III, injury in fact
Publication Title
University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law
Repository Citation
Kreimer, Seth F., "“Spooky Action at a Distance”: Intangible Injury in Fact in the Information Age" (2016). All Faculty Scholarship. 1587.
https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/1587
Included in
American Politics Commons, Civil Procedure Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Courts Commons, Internet Law Commons, Jurisdiction Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Law and Society Commons, Litigation Commons, Policy Design, Analysis, and Evaluation Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons, Public Policy Commons, Supreme Court of the United States Commons
Publication Citation
18 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 745 (2016).