(1) Injury in Fact -- Standing Element 1

Question 1

Injury in Fact must be:

Answer 1

1. Concrete and Particularized
2. Distinct and Palpable; AND
3. Actual or Imminent

Question 2

Injury in Fact is NOT:

Answer 2

1. Abstract
2. Conjectural
3. Hypothetical

Question 3

Types of Injuries Sufficient for standing purposes:

Answer 3

Injuries to a common law right
- a constitutional right
- a statutory right

Question 4

Can Congress allow Federal courts to hear cases with NO injury?

Answer 4

Congress CANNOT allow federal courts to hear cases where there is NO injury.

HOWEVER, Congress by statute can create a right and the deprivation of that right is sufficient for standing.

Question 5

Example of case without Standing [Allen v. Wright] - Can a suit asserting that the government is not acting in the bound of the law be brought in federal court?

Answer 5

African American parents’ challenge to IRS failire to enforce non-discrimination mandate for tax-exempt status re: racially discriminatory private schools –> DISMISSED for lack of standing bc
- injuries indentified in suit were not “judicially cognizable”
- by itself, an assertion that the government is not acting in the bound of law is NOT enough to bring a suit in Federal Court.

Question 6

Example of case WITH Standing [Mass v. EPA]

Answer 6

• Challenge to EPA’s failure to regulate greenhouse gases under CAA - Massachusetts [local governments and private environmental organizations] had standing

Question 7

Future Injury - What satisfies Standing element “Actual or Imminent”

Answer 7

Such injuries are only “actual or imminent [Element of Standing]” where “the threatened injury is ‘certainly impending’”

OR

There is a “substantial risk” that the harm will occue.

Question 8

Future Injury - What does NOT satisfy Standing element “Actual or Imminent”

Answer 8

an “objectively reasonable possibility” that it will sustain the cited harm at some future time

Courts are generally hostile to “standing theories that require guesswork as to how independent decision makers will exercise their judgement,” which almost by definition require speculation as to the likelihood of injury resulting from the 3rd party’s actions.