Plaintiffs Lack Standing to Sue over Notre Dame Law Clinic's Filing Amicus Brief Condemning China's Actions Towards Uyghurs
A court ruled that the plaintiffs lack standing to sue the University of Notre Dame over an amicus brief related to China's actions towards Uyghurs. The plaintiffs' claims were largely based on alleged harms to the Chinese public rather than personal injuries. The court found that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate concrete harm necessary to establish standing under Article III.
- ▪The plaintiffs sought $1.41 billion as an apology for alleged harms to Chinese people in mainland China.
- ▪The court determined that the plaintiffs' claims did not sufficiently demonstrate personal injury or harm.
- ▪The allegations primarily referenced public harm rather than specific injuries suffered by the plaintiffs.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Free Speech Plaintiffs Lack Standing to Sue over Notre Dame Law Clinic's Filing Amicus Brief Condemning China's Actions Towards Uyghurs The plaintiffs had asked for (among other things) "$1.00 as an apology to every Chinese people live in mainland China, total $1.41 billion." Eugene Volokh | 6.5.2026 8:01 AM From Judge Gretchen Lund (N.D. Ind.) Monday in Chen v. Univ. of Notre Dame; the plaintiffs' Complaint focuses on a Notre Dame Law School Religious Liberty Clinic amicus brief in an Argentina court that included allegedly false "website content and related activities accusing China of genocide and crimes against the human rights of Uyghurs in Xinjiang." Plaintiffs' Complaint contains very few allegations involving Plaintiffs themselves; largely, the Complaint references alleged harms…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Reason.com.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Reason.com
