AIDA AUGUSTE v. JOHN WESLEY HYACINTHE

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that “a quest for ill- defined ‘better odds’ is not close to what is required to satisfy the redressability prong of Article III”
• asserting that “nothing but speculation suggested] that schools would act any differently” if the court vacated the interpretation
• requiring that plaintiffs adduce \substantial evidence” that leaves \little doubt as to causation and the likelihood of redress”
• noting that even if appellants prevailed on the merits of their challenge to the Three-Part Test, “nothing but speculation suggests that schools would act any differently...”
• noting that an associational plaintiffs reliance on the possibility that a favorable decision would confer “better odds” that its members’ injuries would be redressed fell far short of the standard set by other cases where the redressability prong was satisfied
• requiring “substantial evidence” in the record “of a causal relationship between the government policy and the third-party conduct, leaving little doubt as to causation and the likelihood of redress”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).