24 Pages Posted: 30 Nov 2012 Last revised: 28 Nov 2013
Date Written: November 30, 2012
This article argues that, in constitutional cases, the standing requirement should be flatly abolished. The primary flaw with standing doctrine is that renders large swathes of the Constitution functionally worthless, contrary to the clear intention of the text and the structure of the document itself, as well as the intentions of those who drafted and ratified it. Further, standing doctrine lacks textual support, historical support, a role in maintaining the separation of powers, or any other practical necessity to warrant its retention.
Keywords: Standing, Justiciability, Constitution, Injury
JEL Classification: K10, K40
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Patrick, Jeremy, A Polemic Against the Standing Requirement in Constitutional Cases (November 30, 2012). Capital University Law Review, Vol. 41, 2013. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2182904 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2182904