Darrell McClanahan, III v. Donald Trump

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 25-3007

___________________________

Darrell Leon McClanahan, III

Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Donald Trump, President of the United States; United States Department of Justice; United States Department of Education

Defendants - Appellees

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Joplin

____________

Submitted: January 21, 2026 Filed: January 27, 2026

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Darrell McClanahan, a Missouri resident, appeals following the district court’s1 dismissal of his pro se complaint for lack of standing. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the 1

Western District of Missouri.

Upon careful review, this court concludes that the district court did not err in dismissing the case, nor in denying leave to amend the complaint. See Gelschus v. Hogen, 47 F.4th 679, 686 (8th Cir. 2022) (standard of review); U.S. ex rel. Raynor v. Nat’l Rural Utils. Coop. Fin., Corp., 690 F.3d 951, 957 (8th Cir. 2012) (same). McClanahan did not allege sufficient facts to render plausible that he suffered an injury the defendants caused and the court can remedy—a jurisdictional necessity. See TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413, 423–24 (2021) (standard for Article III standing); see also Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (pleading standard).

The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________