In October, the Supreme Court will hear a case called Spokeo v. Robins, which poses the question, as formulated by the defendant company, "whether Congress may confer Article III standing upon a plaintiff who suffers no concrete harm, and who therefore could not otherwise invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, by authorizing a private right of action based on a bare violation of a federal statute."
As explained in this April blog post, Spokeo, Inc. publishes reports on consumers, including information such as their financial health, occupation, and wealth. When Spokeo published inaccurate information about him, Robins sued, alleging that Spokeo violated five different Fair Credit Reporting Act requirements by not making required disclosures and not following procedures that are designed to ensure the accuracy of its information. The suit seeks statutory damages under the Act.
Spokeo filed its opening brief on July 2. Reflecting the importance of the case — because of its potential to wipe out a swath of litigation under consumer protection statutes — amici supporting Spokeo filed last week 17 (!) different briefs in support of the company. SCOTUSblog has the list of briefs.
Writing for Reuters, Alison Frankel has this overview of the case and the amicus briefs.