Pg 5

Question 1

What are the elements of individual standing?

Answer 1

– injury in fact
– causation between injury and conduct
– capable of judicial redress

Question 2

What is the element of standing that calls for injury in fact?

Answer 2

This requires a distinct and palpable injury. The plaintiff must have suffered an invasion of a legally protected interest that was concrete, particularized, actual, and imminent - not conjectural or hypothetical. This can be a present injury or significant threat of an imminent injury that is either economic, aesthetic, environmental, or intangible.

Question 3

If a plaintiff lives in a racially gerrymandered district, does he have standing to sue?

Answer 3

Yes, because his injury is assumed.

Question 4

What are the sub-elements for injury in fact as an element of standing?

Answer 4

• concrete and particularized
  – actual or imminent
  – caused by the defendant

Question 5

Do generalized grievances like harm to the environment count as injury in fact for standing?

Answer 5

If they cannot be differentiated from shared members of the public at large, they are not the basis for standing. But widely shared injury can still give standing if the harm is concrete.

Ideological opposition to government policy is not enough.

Question 6

Is it necessary that a harm be a completed harm in order to count as an injury in fact for standing?

Answer 6

No, as long as there is a substantial threat of real harm that is present throughout the entire course of litigation. This essentially means that the injury is certainly impending. Just past exposure is not enough.

Ie: if you invested money into producing a product, but then were stopped from selling it, that would be imminent threat of economic injury

Question 7

If you desire to use or observe animal species is that enough for standing?

Answer 7

Yes, but just working with or observing endangered species does not mean harm if there’s just a single act that affects a portion of a species somewhere in the world. To claim injury for something like environmental damage or animals, you must use the actual area that is affected by the activity, not the rough vicinity

Question 8

If you intend to return someplace that there has been environmental damage to, is that enough for standing to sue?

Answer 8

Not unless you have actual plans to go there

Question 9

If you get asked on an exam which plaintiff has the best standing, which do you pick?

Answer 9

The one that is personally injured. If there are many plaintiffs, pick the one that had an economic or dollar injury

Question 10

If a member of a group claims that the government has erected unconstitutional barriers that make it harder for the plaintiff to get a benefit than for members of other groups, does he have standing?

Answer 10

Yes because he is objecting to the denial of equal treatment under the equal protection clause.

He doesn’t have to prove that if the program was struck down he would’ve gotten the benefit, he just has to show he was ABLE and READY to get the benefit and a discriminatory policy prevented him from doing it on an equal basis.

Injury in fact is the unequal treatment, and he must show causality. Injury is the inability to compete on an equal footing

Question 11

What are examples of things that would count as an injury for standing?

Answer 11

Lost profits, lost market share, reduced sales, etc.

Question 12

What is involved in the element of standing that requires causation?

Answer 12

There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct. It must be fairly traceable to the action of the defendant and not the result of some independent action of a third-party.

Question 13

What is involved in the element of standing that calls for something being capable of judicial redress?

Answer 13

It must be substantially likely, not just speculative, that the relief the plaintiff seeks will redress the injury

Question 14

What are some typical problems that occur regarding standing?

Answer 14

• P can’t prove a personal injury
• P claims an intangible personal injury that is general and not personal
• an organization sues not on behalf of someone suffering actual or threatened injury
• the injury is speculative and uncertain

Question 15

What is required in order for a taxpayer to have standing?

Answer 15

The logical nexus test is implemented. This requires a logical nexus between the status of a person as a taxpayer and the precise nature of the constitutional infringement that is alleged.

Question 16

If there is no congressional legislation, does a citizen have standing to challenge a federal action as unconstitutional?

Answer 16

No, with the exception that citizen taxpayers can challenge government spending when spending violates the establishment clause

Question 17

Do Federal taxpayers have standing to sue just because they are taxpayers?

Answer 17

No, their interest is too remote and uncertain to sue about things like the manner of expenditure since taxes become part of the general revenue and they lose their separate identity with the particular taxpayer. In order to have standing the party that’s bringing the suit must show he has suffered or will suffer an immediate direct injury, not an indefinite injury that is common to people generally

Question 18

Can taxpayers challenge earmarked taxes?

Answer 18

Sometimes they can challenge paying special taxes because the purpose is unconstitutional.

Question 19

What are the circumstances where federal taxpayers can challenge spending?

Answer 19

• if they are challenging the exercise of taxing on the spending power and not just a regulatory measure
  – if they are arguing that the enactment violates a specific constitutional limitation on taxing or spending power

Question 20

How does third-party standing work?

Answer 20

If a practical obstacle stops a party from asserting his own rights, the court allows a third-party to have standing and considers whether that third-party has a sufficient injury in fact to satisfy the case or controversy requirement, and if he can be reasonably expected to properly frame the issues and present them with the necessary adversarial zeal. Courts will not allow this if they think the person seeking standing will not be an adequate representative of the third-party’s interests

Question 21

What is the best plaintiff rule?

Answer 21

A usually can’t raise the legal rights of B, even if A’s injury is enough for his own claim. B is the best person to litigate claims that affect him. This insures that the most effective and concerned advocate is the person before the court

Question 22

What are the things that a court considers when it determines whether someone has third-party standing or not?

Answer 22

• the importance of the relationship between the litigant and the third-party
• the ability of the third-party to vindicate his own rights
• whether the third party’s rights will be diluted if he isn’t allowed the representation

Question 23

What are exceptions for situations when third-party standing is allowed?

Answer 23

– if A can show there’s enough reason for B letting him litigate his claim
– it is difficult or impossible for B to do it himself
– if there’s a close personal relationship between A and B [doctor-patient: privacy rights protected in abortion issue]

Question 24

What is associational standing?

Answer 24

This allows organizations to raise the legal rights of and bring suit on behalf of their members.

Question 25

What are the elements that are required to have associational standing?

Answer 25

– individual member has injury in fact for article III standing
– the interests are relevant and germane to the organization’s purposes
– the claims asserted or the relief requested do not require participation of the individual member
– the organization itself has an adversarial interest

Question 26

What does it mean that the individual member must have an injury in fact in order for associational standing to be allowed?

Answer 26

That person must technically be able to assert his own rights because he has an injury in fact

Question 27

What is involved in the element for associational standing that requires that the interest be relevant or germane to the organization’s purpose?

Answer 27

It must relate to that purpose.

For example, universities have the requirement to educate, and immigration laws may have a peripheral effect on this, but it isn’t the purpose of the university to exercise control over immigration policies

Question 28

What is involved in the element for associational standing that requires that the organization itself has an adversarial interest?

Answer 28

The organization must have a genuine case or controversy capable of judicial resolution. It cannot be advisory or theoretical.

Ie: this occurs when all of the association’s members collectively do something, like access the market, and no individual facts separate the member’s interests

It must also be proven that the members possess an indicia of membership in the organization. This means that the person associates with the organization through contribution or participation. Only one member must individually have standing

Question 29

How does associational standing depend on the nature of the relief being sought?

Answer 29

Injunctive, declaratory, and prospective relief are easier to get because all members will benefit from it. If the injury is not common to the entire membership or shared by all in equal degree, the association doesn’t have standing to sue for its member’s damage claims