Griffin v. Dep't of Labor Fed. Credit Union
912 F.3d 649 (2019)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A plaintiff who is legally barred from using a defendant's services cannot suffer a concrete and particularized injury from an inaccessible website and therefore lacks Article III standing to sue that defendant under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Facts:
- The Department of Labor Federal Credit Union's membership is legally restricted under the Federal Credit Union Act to current and former employees of the Department of Labor and their immediate families.
- Clarence Griffin is a blind individual who uses a screen reader to access the internet.
- Griffin is not, and has never been, eligible for membership in the Credit Union, as he has no personal or familial connection to the Department of Labor.
- In October 2017, Griffin attempted to access the Credit Union's website, which describes its services and products.
- Griffin found the website inaccessible because his screen reader could not interpret linked images that lacked alternative text, he had to navigate redundant links, and form labels were missing.
Procedural Posture:
- Clarence Griffin filed a lawsuit against the Department of Labor Federal Credit Union in the U.S. District Court.
- The complaint alleged that the Credit Union's website violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and sought injunctive relief, costs, and attorney's fees.
- The Credit Union filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1), arguing Griffin lacked constitutional standing.
- The district court granted the Credit Union's motion to dismiss the case.
- Griffin (appellant) appealed the district court's dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, with the Credit Union as the appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a visually impaired individual, who is legally ineligible to use a credit union's services, have Article III standing to sue the credit union under the Americans with Disabilities Act for maintaining a website that is inaccessible to him?
Opinions:
Majority - Wilkinson
No. A plaintiff who is legally barred from making use of a defendant's services does not have constitutional standing to sue under the ADA for an allegedly deficient website. To establish Article III standing, a plaintiff must show an injury in fact that is concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent. Griffin's alleged injury is not concrete because the Federal Credit Union Act creates an insurmountable legal barrier between him and the Credit Union's services, making any dignitary or informational harm abstract, similar to how geographic distance can render a harm abstract. The injury is not particularized because this same legal barrier severs any connection that would differentiate his injury from that of the general public. Finally, there is no threat of imminent future injury because his stated intent to return to the website is not plausible, as he can never avail himself of the Credit Union's services, and his status as an ADA 'tester' is insufficient on its own to create standing.
Concurring - King
No. The court should have resolved the case on narrower grounds without needing to analyze the boundaries of dignitary or informational harm. The appeal can be resolved solely on the basis that Griffin failed to plausibly allege a threat of future injury, which is a prerequisite for seeking injunctive relief. The complaint offers no plausible reason why Griffin would ever visit the Credit Union's website again, given that he is legally ineligible to use its services. This failure to allege a credible intent to return is sufficient to find he lacks standing for the injunctive relief sought.
Analysis:
This case establishes a significant limitation on ADA website accessibility claims, particularly against membership-based organizations with legally defined eligibility criteria. By analogizing a legal barrier (ineligibility for membership) to a physical one (geographic distance), the court narrows the scope of what constitutes a 'concrete and particularized' injury for standing purposes. The decision signals that 'tester' plaintiffs cannot establish standing to sue entities whose services they are legally forbidden from ever using. This precedent may shield credit unions, alumni associations, and other exclusive organizations from website accessibility lawsuits brought by ineligible individuals.
Unlock the full brief for Griffin v. Dep't of Labor Fed. Credit Union