You are on page 1of 1


For essay purposes: you first issue is standing whenever you have a plaintiff in federal court, your first issue to discuss is standing whenever there is a plaintiff in federal court. Does the plaintiff have the right to bring suit in federal court. You have to talk about this!! The plaintiffs goal is to show that she has a concrete personal stake in the outcome. To establish such a stake, the P must satisfy the Constitutional Standard (imposed by the case and controversy) and prudential limitations. Constitutional standard: Two requirements: 1. P must show injury in fact: Most of the time this is economic but in Sierra v. Morton, the injury can be asthetic or environmental BUT must arise from governmental conduct. 2. Causation: the relief sought must eliminate the harm alleged (redressability): Tougher to satisfy, Ex. P were low income members of minority suing the city claiming zoning ordinance was denying them affordable housing, Justice said they had no standing because the housing in question would still not be affordable. The relief sought would not remedy the harm alleged. Prudenital Limitations: Limitations imposed by the court in itse . Even where CS has been satisfied there are some instances: 1. Third party standing: P may only advance his or her own constitutional rights, no third party standing. Exception: where the P can satisfy 2 requirements: 1. close relationship/nexus b/w that Ps rights and the 3rd P rights. 2. P has to show special need to adjudicate. Ex. Law that allowed 18 year old women to buy beer while men had to be 21. The court said there was a special need cuz the bars were losing money and that there was special relationship. Others: Dr. for patient, school for the minor students, labor union or association may challenge lay offs of its workers. 2. Abstract: Here we are looking at citizen standing. It is generally denied. Example: Federal Statute that required director of cia to issue an annual accounting for all funds used and the CIA failed to do so. Mr. Richardson brought action challenging lack of CIA action. Ct said that as a private citizen, there was no standing cuz plaintiff had not alleged any mismanagement or harm or injury so it was abstract generalized grievence. State Taxpayer standing: they do have the standing to challenge measureable standards, state tax payer busing student to parocrial schools. If taxpayer What about federal taxpayer: no, too abstract Exception: 1. to make an establishment clause challenge 2. to an expenditure enacted under taxing and spending power (Ex. congress authorized a gift of federal property in form of gift of cargo plane and that secretary could give it to anyone, the boys group asked for it and was getting ready to do so when the church group approached and they said yes. Who has standing? This is federal property and not the taxing and spending power.