Here:
Petition here.
Fair Credit Reporting Act
Meyers v. Wisconsin Oneida Cert Petition — Another Immunity Case
Here is the petition in Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin:
Questions presented:
1. Whether Congress abrogated the sovereign immunity of an Indian tribe under 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq., by providing that “any…government” may be liable for damages.
2. Whether an individual who receives a computer generated cash register receipt displaying more than the last five digits of the individual’s credit card number and the card’s expiration date has suffered a concrete injury sufficient to confer standing under Article III of the United States Constitution.
Lower court materials here.
Federal Court Holds Tribes Immune from Fair Credit Reporting Act Claims
Here are the materials in Meyers v. Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin (W.D. Wis.):
Supreme Court Decides Question involving Federal Immunity and the Little Tucker Act
Here is today’s opinion in United States v. Bormes.
An excerpt from Justice Scalia’s unanimous opinion:
[The Federal Circuit] distorted our case law in applying to FCRA the immunity-waiver standard we expressed in White Mountain Apache Tribe, 537 U. S., at 472: whether the statute “‘can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damage sustained.’ ” 626 F. 3d, at 578. That is the test for determining whether a statute that imposes an obligation but does not provide the elements of a cause of action qualifies for suit under the Tucker Act—more specifically, whether the failure to perform an obligation undoubtedly imposed on the Federal Government creates a right to monetary relief. See White Mountain Apache Tribe, supra; Mitchell II, 463 U. S. 206. That test is not relevant when a “mandate of compensation” is contained in a statute that provides a detailed judicial remedy against those who are subject to its requirements. FCRA is such a statute. By using the “fair interpretation” test to determine whether FCRA’s civil liability provisions apply to the United States, the Federal Circuit directed the test to a purpose for which it was not designed and leapfrogged the threshold concern that the Tucker Act cannot be superimposed on an existing remedial scheme.
Turtle Talk 