Allen v. Wright: No cognizable injury when P objected to the
policies of the IRS or that they may have felt stigmatized
(not concrete) ---BUT diminished ability to attend integrated
school does.
Standing
Mass. v. EPA: impact of climate change is Inj. in fact even if
"widely shared"
First, check for Constitutional
Standing
Is the injury concrete and
particularized?
Personal Injury?
Is the Injury actual and
imminent?
Is the harm actually caused
by the defendant/challenged
action?
Is there causation?
Is the defendant/challenged
action a but for cause of the
harm?
Injury redressable by court?
Is there a remedy?
Is it likely that a favorable
decision will redress it?
Constitutional
Standing
Plaintiff must assert own
right, not the rights of 3rd P
Prudential Standing?
congress may
override pru. limits
by statute
Not an advisory opinion?
Zone of Interest: P must
allege an interest the statute
was designed to protect
No "generalized
grievance...common to all
members of the public"
Lujan: interest in observing animals, even for aesthetic
reasons is injury. BUT must cite concrete plans or specify day
which they intend to see--for "environmental injury" plaintiffs
must allege they are using or will use area where alleged
injury will occur
LA v. Lyons: No showing that likely to be placed in
chokehold at some future date (imminent?)
Transunion v. Ramirez: harm to reputation is concrete
injury, BUT possibility that such harm may occur is not
sufficiently concrete
Allen v. Wright: fails causation bc link b/w challenged
IRS policies and the alleged injury too attenuated,
mostly b.c injury results from independnt action of 3d P
Mass v. EPA: even though impact of inaction of EPA is
small and incremental, passes causation
Mass v. EPA: although action wouldnt stem global
warming, would have some effect and would redress
part of injury
Lujan: since agencies charged with administering
projects not parties, no redress....add'tl no showing that
foreign projects will be suspended if denied US aid
Exceptions
1.Plaintiff has a relationship with the 3d party; and
2. There is some genuine obstacle to the 3d
party's vindication of his or her own rights
(Singleton v. Wulff: Doctor assert rights of woman
seeking abortion)
Barrows v. Jackson: White property owner can
assert rights of potential Black purchasers who
were denied right to purchase due to racially
restrictive covenant in deed
Craig v. Boren: bartender can assert EPC of
young man to purchase (economic relationship
to specified class?)
Gilmore v. Utah: Four justices argue whether
mother of prisoner facing death pen. can
assert prisoners constitutional objection to DP
Elk Grove v. Newdow: Bio father w/o legal
custody cant assert child's 1st am. not to be
influenced by lang. or pledge of Allegiance
Case is ripe but not moot?
US. v. Richardson: status of taxpayer does not
give standing to require public statement of
expenditure for CIA (art III or simply prudent'l?)
PASS GO to Political Question
Mass. v. EPA: state can sue for harm of all citizens
bc states have special treatment because of role
as "quasi sovereign"