Standing is easy to describe but difficult to apply. At a minimum, standing requires three elements: (1) injury-in-fact; (2) traceability to conduct of the defendant; and (3) that a favorable decision could provide redress for the injury. This Note outlines the development of the standing doctrine from Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife through Summers v. Earth Island Institute and examines how several courts have applied this standard to their cases. It also analyzes Pollack v. Department of Justice. It proposes an approach that demands more than pleadings but removes the court's license to pre-litigate the merits of the case under the guise of the standing doctrine. And finally, it argues that standing should be retired when it comes to what are now traditional environmental claims because the elements of standing are so intertwined with the merits of the case.
Andrew D. Dorn,
How Many Environmental Plaintiffs Are Still Standing?,
Seventh Circuit Rev.
Available at: http://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/seventhcircuitreview/vol5/iss2/5