INS v. Legalization Assistance Project of Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, 510 U.S. 1301, 5 (1993)

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Cite as: 510 U. S. 1301 (1993)

Opinion in Chambers

here) or by persons "adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action within the meaning of a relevant statute." 5 U. S. C. § 702 (emphasis added). We have consistently interpreted this latter clause to permit review only in cases brought by a person whose putative injuries are "within the 'zone of interests' sought to be protected by the statutory provision whose violation forms the legal basis for his complaint." Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation, 497 U. S. 871, 883 (1990) (NWF); see also Clarke v. Securities Industry Assn., 479 U. S. 388, 396-397 (1987).

I believe that, were it presented with this question, this Court would grant certiorari and conclude that the respondents are outside the zone of interests IRCA seeks to protect, and that therefore they had no standing to seek the order entered by the District Court. The District Court's decision and the Court of Appeals decision on which it relies, 976 F. 2d, at 1208, conflict with Ayuda, Inc. v. Reno, 7 F. 3d 246 (CADC 1993), and relate to an important question of federal law. See this Court's Rule 10. Moreover, on the merits, IRCA was clearly meant to protect the interests of undocumented aliens, not the interests of organizations such as respondents. Though such organizations did play a role in the IRCA scheme—during the amnesty period, they were so-called "qualified designated entities," which were to "assis[t] in the program of legalization provided under this section," § 1255a(c)(2)—there is no indication that IRCA was in any way addressed to their interests. The fact that the INS regulation may affect the way an organization allocates its resources—or, for that matter, the way an employer who currently employs illegal aliens or a landlord who currently rents to illegal aliens allocates its resources—does not give standing to an entity which is not within the zone of interests the statute meant to protect. NWF, supra, at 883.

The balance of equities also tips in the INS' favor. The order would impose a considerable administrative burden on the INS, and would delay the deportation of—and require

1305

Page:   Index   Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: October 4, 2007