Not with a Bang but a Whimper: Barclift, Intangible Harms, and the Struggle for Standing After TransUnion

On March 30, 2024, in Barclift v. Keystone Credit Services, LLC, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that a plaintiff lacked Article III standing to bring a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claim because her alleged intangible harms did not bear a sufficiently close relationship to harms traditionally recognized at common law. In reaching this conclusion, the Third Circuit attempted to align itself with other circuits that apply a broader kind-of-harm approach to standing, deepening a split with courts that use a narrower element-for-element analysis. This Comment argues that the Third Circuit misapplied Supreme Court precedent and that the element-for-element approach improperly constricts Article III standing, undermines the congressional intent underlying the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and threatens to erode access to justice for plaintiffs asserting intangible harms.