Darrell McClanahan, III v. Donald Trump

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 27, 2026
Docket25-3007
StatusUnpublished

This text of Darrell McClanahan, III v. Donald Trump (Darrell McClanahan, III v. Donald Trump) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Darrell McClanahan, III v. Donald Trump, (8th Cir. 2026).

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Submitted: January 21, 2026 Filed: January 27, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________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. ______________________________

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 2007)
TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez
594 U.S. 413 (Supreme Court, 2021)
Robert Gelschus v. Clifford Hogen
47 F.4th 679 (Eighth Circuit, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Darrell McClanahan, III v. Donald Trump, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darrell-mcclanahan-iii-v-donald-trump-ca8-2026.