Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1934987
 
 

Footnotes (302)



 


 



Standing Lessons: What We Can Learn When Conservative Plaintiffs Lose Under Article III Standing Doctrine


Heather Elliott


University of Alabama - School of Law

September 28, 2011

Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 87, 2012
U of Alabama Public Law Research Paper No. 1934987

Abstract:     
The Supreme Court’s Article III standing doctrine has plagued liberal groups for nearly forty years. Recently, however, the doctrine has blocked a number of conservative lawsuits opposing gay marriage, the 2010 health care law, and the expansion of federal funding for stem-cell research.

What can we learn from these cases? Because contemporary criticisms of standing doctrine have usually come from the left and defenses from the right, it is commonplace to associate arguments for broad standing with left-wing political agendas. But, as some scholars have shown, older versions of standing doctrine served liberal purposes in the New Deal and its immediate aftermath. The current strict standing doctrine, now keeping conservative activists out of federal court, may have returned to its roots.

But if one truly believes that the federal courts should be open to more plaintiffs, one should instead see that these cases present a strange-bedfellows moment that might persuade a majority of the Court to alter existing standing doctrine. Liberal members of the Court generally advocate for a more expansive doctrine of standing; conservative members of the Court usually support restrictive standing doctrine, but their interest in reaching the merits of certain cases may lead them to agree to certain reforms. In this Article, I address that prospect, as well as the possibility that Congress might enact legislation to force the standing question.

If the Court seizes the opportunity to reform standing doctrine, what are its options? Will changes to the doctrine affect all plaintiffs? Or are these recent examples of conservative impact litigation different in kind from the cases that generated current standing doctrine? In answering these questions, I review recent suggestions for amending the doctrine. In the end, I conclude, these new conservative cases are lamentably unlikely to lead to much change in the law of standing.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 49

Keywords: standing, Article III, federal jurisdiction, separation of powers, impact litigation, conservative politics

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: September 30, 2011  

Suggested Citation

Elliott, Heather, Standing Lessons: What We Can Learn When Conservative Plaintiffs Lose Under Article III Standing Doctrine (September 28, 2011). Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 87, 2012; U of Alabama Public Law Research Paper No. 1934987. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1934987

Contact Information

Heather Elliott (Contact Author)
University of Alabama - School of Law ( email )
P.O. Box 870382
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 479
Downloads: 56
Download Rank: 212,427
Footnotes:  302

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.297 seconds