Whether codefendants in a lawsuit can be treated as independent third parties not before the court for purposes of Article III standing traceability

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Petitioners were sex trafficked within Nevada’s legalized prostitution system, and sued the businesses that trafficked them, and the government entities that licensed, incentivized, and profited from the businesses, alleging the defendants cooperated in Petitioners’ exploitation. Nevada government entities require persons in the sex trade to be controlled by a licensed business (i.e., a pimp), permit them to be subjected to debt bondage in legal brothels and strip clubs, and profit from the sex trafficking that results through licensing fees and taxes — including a state tax on escort agencies and strip clubs. Petitioners alleged that Respondents violated the Trafficking Victims Protection Act by benefiting from sex trafficking and the Thirteenth Amendment by enabling slavery. The district court determined that Petitioners stated a claim for sex trafficking against a brothel and for benefiting from trafficking against a strip club, but dismissed the government defendants, citing lack of causation for Article III standing. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit extended this Court’s principle that independent third parties “not before the court” may break the causal chain, Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992), to include parties to the case, who are before the court, concluding on this basis that Petitioners’ injuries from being trafficked by co-defendant sex trade businesses were not “fairly traceable” to government defendants. The questions presented are: 1. In an Article III standing analysis, may codefendants in a lawsuit, against whom a claim has been stated, be treated as independent third parties “not before the court” for purposes of determining traceability as to government actors? u 2. Does Article III standing’s traceability requirement exclude Section 1983 claims based on government actors enabling slavery and involuntary servitude in violation of the Thirteenth Amendment and benefiting from sex trafficking under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act?