(Slip Opinion)              OCTOBER TERM, 2023                                       1

                                       Syllabus

         NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is
       being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
       The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
       prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
       See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 

, 337.


SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

                                       Syllabus

                 ACHESON HOTELS, LLC v. LAUFER

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
                  THE FIRST CIRCUIT

   No. 22–429.      Argued October 4, 2023—Decided December 5, 2023
The Court granted review in this case to consider whether Deborah Lau-
  fer has Article III standing to sue hotels whose websites failed to state
  whether they have accessible rooms for the disabled as required by the
  Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, even if Laufer had no thought
  of staying at the hotels, much less booking a room. After a lower court
  sanctioned her lawyer, Laufer voluntarily dismissed her pending suits,
  including her case against Acheson Hotels, LLC, and filed a suggestion
  of mootness in this Court. Though Laufer’s case is moot, the circuit
  split on the issue briefed and argued in this Court is very much alive.
Held: This case is vacated as moot. The Court has the authority to ad-
 dress jurisdictional issues of mootness and standing in any order it
 chooses. See Sinochem Int’l Co. v. Malaysia Int’l Shipping Corp., 

, 431. And while the Court is sensitive to Acheson’s concern
 about litigants manipulating this Court’s jurisdiction, the Court is not
 convinced that Laufer abandoned her case in an effort to evade the
 Court’s review. Pp. 2–3.

, vacated and remanded.

   BARRETT, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,
C. J., and ALITO, SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, GORSUCH, and KAVANAUGH, JJ.,
joined. THOMAS, J., and JACKSON, J., filed opinions concurring in the
judgment.
                        Cite as: 

 (2023)                              1

                             Opinion of the Court

     NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
     United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
     Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Washington, D. C. 20543,
     pio@supremecourt.gov, of any typographical or other formal errors.


SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
                                   _________________

                                   No. 22–429
                                   _________________


    ACHESON HOTELS, LLC v. DEBORAH LAUFER
 ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
             APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                              [December 5, 2023]

   JUSTICE BARRETT delivered the opinion of the Court.
   Deborah Laufer has sued hundreds of hotels whose web-
sites failed to state whether they have rooms accessible to
the disabled. As the sheer number of lawsuits suggests, she
does not focus her efforts on hotels where she has any
thought of staying, much less booking a room. Instead,
Laufer systematically searches the web to find hotels that
fail to provide accessibility information and sues to force
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (ADA), 

, 

 et seq. Ordi-
narily, the hotels settle her claims and pay her attorney’s
fees. But some have resisted, arguing that Laufer is not
injured by the absence of information about rooms she has
no plans to reserve. Only plaintiffs who allege a concrete
injury have standing to sue in federal court. Laufer, these
hotels have argued, is suing to enforce the law rather than
to remedy her own harms.
   Laufer has singlehan