“Nothing in Sanders suggests that § 702 does not grant a cause of action to one suffering a legal wrong within the meaning of a relevant statute at the hands of an agency so long as there is an independent statutory basis for jurisdiction.”
How later courts described this case
- “Nothing in Sanders suggests that § 702 does not grant a cause of action to one suffering a legal wrong within the meaning of a relevant statute at the hands of an agency so long as there is an independent statutory basis for jurisdiction.”
- "On many occasions we have reviewed agency action or inaction at the request of a party who alleged that its procedural rights (as created either by the agency's own regulations, or the Administrative Procedure Act) had been violated."
- denial of government investigation of discrimination complaints is cognizable injury regardless of whether complaints are ultimately meritorious
- “Complainants are injured if this procedural right is denied them, regardless of whether the complaint is ultimately found meritorious.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
TAMM, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part, dissenting in part:
I am in full agreement with the majority, for the reasons set forth in parts II and III of Judge Bazelon’s opinion, that the order of the district court should be reversed. I am unable to concur in part I of the majority opinion, however, because of my belief that standing to sue in federal court must be based on more than allegations of violations of procedural regulations by an agency. In my view, injury to an underlying substantive interest must be alleged. Thus, in this case, standing is based on alleged harm resulting from discrimination rather than alleged violation of procedural regulations by the Secretary of Treasury.