An Era of Broad Remedies Makes Standing Even More Important

"Few exercises of the judicial power are more likely to undermine public confidence in the neutrality and integrity of the Judiciary than one which casts the Court in the role of a Council of Revision, conferring on itself the power to invalidate laws at the behest of anyone who disagrees with them. In an era of frequent litigation, class actions, sweeping injunctions with prospective effect, and continuing jurisdiction to enforce judicial remedies, courts must be more careful to insist on the formal rules of standing, not less so."

Arizona Christian Sch. Tuition Org. v. Winn, 563 U.S. 125, 145–46 (2011).

Comments

[LawTalkingGuy]

This is true especially if our courts have decided that grave harms to third parties not in the case simply don’t matter in remedies analysis anymore.

[Patrick Henry, the 2nd]

Standing is used by courts to avoid doing its job. Standing should be banned.

[David Nieporent]

No; deciding standing is the court's job.