Standing (law)
   HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

In law, standing or ''locus standi'' is a condition that a party seeking a legal remedy must show they have, by demonstrating to the
court A court is any person or institution, often as a government institution, with the authority to adjudicate legal disputes between parties and carry out the administration of justice in civil, criminal, and administrative matters in accordance ...
, sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case. A party has standing in the following situations: * The party is directly subject to an adverse effect by the
statute A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs the legal entities of a city, state, or country by way of consent. Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy. Statutes are rules made by le ...
or action in question, and the harm suffered will continue unless the court grants relief in the form of
damages At common law, damages are a remedy in the form of a monetary award to be paid to a claimant as compensation for loss or injury. To warrant the award, the claimant must show that a breach of duty has caused foreseeable loss. To be recognised at ...
or a finding that the law either does not apply to the party or that the law is void or can be nullified. This is called the "something to lose" doctrine, in which the party has standing because they will be directly harmed by the conditions for which they are asking the court for relief. * The party is not directly harmed by the conditions by which they are petitioning the court for relief but asks for it because the harm involved has some reasonable relation to their situation, and the continued existence of the harm may affect others who might not be able to ask a court for relief. In the United States, this is the grounds for asking for a law to be struck down as violating the
First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws that regulate an establishment of religion, or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, th ...
, because while the plaintiff might not be directly affected, the law might so adversely affect others that one might never know what was not done or created by those who fear they would become subject to the law. This is known as the "
chilling effect In a legal context, a chilling effect is the inhibition or discouragement of the legitimate exercise of natural and legal rights by the threat of legal sanction. A chilling effect may be caused by legal actions such as the passing of a law, the ...
s" doctrine. * The party is granted automatic standing by act of law. Under some environmental laws in the United States, a party may sue someone causing pollution to certain waterways without a federal permit, even if the party suing is not harmed by the pollution being generated. The law allows the
plaintiff A plaintiff ( Π in legal shorthand) is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an ''action'') before a court. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy. If this search is successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the p ...
to receive
attorney's fees Attorney's fee is a chiefly United States term for compensation for legal services performed by an attorney ( lawyer or law firm) for a client, in or out of court. It may be an hourly, flat-rate or contingent fee. Recent studies suggest that when ...
if they substantially prevail in the action. In some U.S. states, a person who believes a book, film or other work of art is obscene may sue in their own name to have the work banned directly without having to ask a
District Attorney In the United States, a district attorney (DA), county attorney, state's attorney, prosecuting attorney, commonwealth's attorney, or state attorney is the chief prosecutor and/or chief law enforcement officer representing a U.S. state in a l ...
to do so. In the United States, the current doctrine is that a person cannot bring a suit challenging the
constitutionality Constitutionality is said to be the condition of acting in accordance with an applicable constitution; "Webster On Line" the status of a law, a procedure, or an act's accordance with the laws or set forth in the applicable constitution. When l ...
of a law unless they can demonstrate that they are or will "imminently" be harmed by the law. Otherwise, the court will rule that the plaintiff "lacks standing" to bring the suit, and will dismiss the case without considering the merits of the claim of unconstitutionality.


Australia

Australia has a
common law In law, common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law created by judges and similar quasi-judicial tribunals by virtue of being stated in written opinions."The common law is not a brooding omnipresen ...
understanding of ''locus standi'' or standing which is expressed in
statute A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs the legal entities of a city, state, or country by way of consent. Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy. Statutes are rules made by le ...
s such as the
Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 ''Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977'' (Cth) is an Act of the Parliament of Australia, which created the ability to appeal the decision at the Federal Court of Australia for a person or other parties affected by most administra ...
and common law decisions of the High Court of Australia especially the case ''Australian Conservation Foundation v Commonwealth'' (1980).. At common law, the test for standing is whether the plaintiff has a "special interest in the subject matter of the action". Under the ''Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act'' 1977 to have standing the applicant must be ‘a person who is aggrieved’,. defined as ‘a person whose interests are adversely affected’ by the decision or conduct complained of.(4). This has generally been interpreted in accordance with the common law test. There is no open standing, Standing in public interest cases
Queensland Public Interest Law Clearing House Incorporated
unless statute allows it, or represents needs of a specified class of people.. The issue is one of remoteness... Standing may apply to class of aggrieved people, where essentially the closeness of the
plaintiff A plaintiff ( Π in legal shorthand) is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an ''action'') before a court. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy. If this search is successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the p ...
to the subject matter is the test. Furthermore, a plaintiff must show that he or she has been specially affected in comparison with the public at large. Also, while there is no open standing per se,
prerogative writ A prerogative writ is a historic term for a writ (official order) that directs the behavior of another arm of government, such as an agency, official, or other court. It was originally available only to the Crown under English law, and reflected ...
s like
certiorari In law, ''certiorari'' is a court process to seek judicial review of a decision of a lower court or government agency. ''Certiorari'' comes from the name of an English prerogative writ, issued by a superior court to direct that the record of ...
,
writ of prohibition A writ of prohibition is a writ directing a subordinate to stop doing something the law prohibits. This writ is often issued by a superior court to the lower court directing it not to proceed with a case which does not fall under its jurisdicti ...
,
quo warranto In law, especially English and American common law, ''quo warranto'' (Medieval Latin for "by what warrant?") is a prerogative writ requiring the person to whom it is directed to show what authority they have for exercising some right, power, or ...
and
habeas corpus ''Habeas corpus'' (; from Medieval Latin, ) is a recourse in law through which a person can report an unlawful detention or imprisonment to a court and request that the court order the custodian of the person, usually a prison official, t ...
have a low burden in establishing standing.
Australian courts also recognise amicus curiae (friend of the court), and the various
Attorneys General In most common law jurisdictions, the attorney general or attorney-general (sometimes abbreviated AG or Atty.-Gen) is the main legal advisor to the government. The plural is attorneys general. In some jurisdictions, attorneys general also have exe ...
s have a presumed standing in
administrative law Administrative law is the division of law that governs the activities of government agency, executive branch agencies of Forms of government, government. Administrative law concerns executive branch rule making (executive branch rules are gener ...
cases.


Canada

In
Canadian Canadians (french: Canadiens) are people identified with the country of Canada. This connection may be residential, legal, historical or cultural. For most Canadians, many (or all) of these connections exist and are collectively the source of ...
administrative law Administrative law is the division of law that governs the activities of government agency, executive branch agencies of Forms of government, government. Administrative law concerns executive branch rule making (executive branch rules are gener ...
, whether an individual has standing to bring an application for judicial review, or an appeal from the decision of a tribunal, is governed by the language of the particular statute under which the application or the appeal is brought. Some statutes provide for a narrow right of standing while others provide for a broader right of standing. Frequently a litigant wishes to bring a
civil action - A lawsuit is a proceeding by a party or parties against another in the civil court of law. The archaic term "suit in law" is found in only a small number of laws still in effect today. The term "lawsuit" is used in reference to a civil act ...
for a
declaratory judgment A declaratory judgment, also called a declaration, is the legal determination of a court that resolves legal uncertainty for the litigants. It is a form of legally binding preventive by which a party involved in an actual or possible legal ma ...
against a public body or official. This is considered an aspect of administrative law, sometimes with a constitutional dimension, as when the litigant seeks to have legislation declared unconstitutional.


Public interest standing

The
Supreme Court of Canada The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC; french: Cour suprême du Canada, CSC) is the Supreme court, highest court in the Court system of Canada, judicial system of Canada. It comprises List of Justices of the Supreme Court of Canada, nine justices, wh ...
developed the concept of public interest standing in three constitutional cases commonly called "the Standing trilogy": '' Thorson v. Attorney General of Canada'', ''
Nova Scotia Board of Censors v. McNeil ''Nova Scotia (Board of Censors) v McNeil'',
978 Year 978 ( CMLXXVIII) was a common year starting on Tuesday (link will display the full calendar) of the Julian calendar. Events By place Byzantine Empire * Battle of Pankaleia: Rebel forces under General Bardas Skleros are defeated ...
2 S.C.R. 662 is a famous pre-Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Charter decision from the Supreme Court of Canada on freedom of expression and the criminal law power under the Constitution A ...
'', and '' Minister of Justice v. Borowski''. The trilogy was summarized as follows in '' Canadian Council of Churches v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration)'': Public-interest standing is also available in non-constitutional cases, as the Court found in ''Finlay v. Canada (Minister of Finance)''.


International courts

The
Council of Europe The Council of Europe (CoE; french: Conseil de l'Europe, ) is an international organisation founded in the wake of World War II to uphold European Convention on Human Rights, human rights, democracy and the Law in Europe, rule of law in Europe. ...
created the first international court before which individuals have automatic ''locus standi''.


Nigeria

Like in other jurisdictions, the right to approach a court is contained in the Constitution. The right to approach a court has been interpreted in several cases, this has led to the right to be view differently in different cases. In recent times, there have been different approaches to locus standi. They are: * Traditional approach — only the party who has suffered pecuniary damage or special damage can seek redress in a court of law. In the case of Airtel Networks Ltd. v. George it was held that ″a party is said to have locus if he has shown sufficient interest in the action and that his civil rights and obligations have been or are in danger of being infringed″. Under this approach, a party can only seek redress provided he has proved to the satisfaction of the court that he has suffered sufficient damage over and above any other persons in the concern action. Particularly, only the Attorney General can seek redress in any case on public affairs except the party is authorised through fiat emanates from the Attorney General. * Liberal approach — a departure or exception to the traditional approach. Locus standi may be granted to any person who challenges any unconstitutionality provided the person is subject to the constitution.Fawehinmi v. President (2007)14 NWLR
054 The Type 054 (NATO Codename Jiangkai I) is a class of People's Republic of China, Chinese multi-role frigate, frigates that were commissioned in the People's Liberation Army Navy Surface Force in 2005. They superseded the Type 053H3 frigates. Only ...
275
This expands locus standi on constitutional issues. Justice Aboki of the Court of Appeal said "the requirement of (strict) locus standi become unnecessary in constitutional issues as it will merely impede judicial function". Likewise, any person can challenge infringement of fundamental human rights.


United Kingdom

In British administrative law, an applicant needs to have a sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates. This sufficient interest requirement has been construed liberally by the courts. As
Lord Diplock William John Kenneth Diplock, Baron Diplock, (8 December 1907 – 14 October 1985) was a British barrister and judge who served as a lord of appeal in ordinary between 1968 and until his death in 1985. Appointed to the English High Court in ...
put it:
would ... be a grave danger to escape ''
lacuna Lacuna (plural lacunas or lacunae) may refer to: Related to the meaning "gap" * Lacuna (manuscripts), a gap in a manuscript, inscription, text, painting, or musical work ** Great Lacuna, a lacuna of eight leaves where there was heroic Old Norse p ...
'' in our system of public law if a pressure group ... or even a single public spirited taxpayer, were prevented by outdated technical rules of ''locus standi'' from bringing the matter to the attention of the court to vindicate the rule of law and get the unlawful conduct stopped.
In the
law of contract A contract is a legally enforceable agreement between two or more parties that creates, defines, and governs mutual rights and obligations between them. A contract typically involves the transfer of goods, services, money, or a promise to tr ...
, the doctrine of
privity Privity is the legal term for a close, mutual, or successive relationship to the same right of property or the power to enforce a promise or warranty. It is an important concept in contract law. Contract law {{main article, Privity of contract The ...
meant that only those who were party to a contract could sue or be sued upon it. This doctrine was substantially amended by the
Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 The Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (c. 31) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that significantly reformed the common law doctrine of privity and "thereby emovedone of the most universally disliked and criticised b ...
. which allows beneficiaries under a contract to enforce it. Almost all criminal prosecutions are brought by the state via the
Crown Prosecution Service The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is the principal public agency for conducting criminal prosecutions in England and Wales. It is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions. The main responsibilities of the CPS are to provide legal advi ...
, so private prosecutions are rare. An exception was the case of
Whitehouse v Lemon ''Whitehouse v Lemon'' is a 1977 court case involving the blasphemy law in the United Kingdom. It was the last successful blasphemy trial in the UK. Facts James Kirkup's poem '' The Love that Dares to Speak its Name'' was published in the 3 Ju ...
where Mrs Mary Whitehouse, a self-appointed guardian of suburban morality, was permitted to bring a private prosecution for " blasphemous libel" against the publisher of ''
Gay News ''Gay News'' was a fortnightly newspaper in the United Kingdom founded in June 1972 in a collaboration between former members of the Gay Liberation Front and members of the Campaign for Homosexual Equality (CHE). At the newspaper's height, circul ...
'', Denis Lemon. Victims of crime have standing to sue the perpetrator and they may claim criminal injuries compensation from the state. If the state fails properly to bring a case, the victim or his family may have standing to bring a private prosecution, as in the case of
Stephen Lawrence Stephen or Steven is a common English first name. It is particularly significant to Christians, as it belonged to Saint Stephen ( grc-gre, Στέφανος ), an early disciple and deacon who, according to the Book of Acts, was stoned to death; ...
.


United States

In
United States law The law of the United States comprises many levels of codified and uncodified forms of law, of which the most important is the nation's Constitution, which prescribes the foundation of the federal government of the United States, as well a ...
, the Supreme Court has stated, "In essence the question of standing is whether the
litigant - A lawsuit is a proceeding by a party or parties against another in the civil court of law. The archaic term "suit in law" is found in only a small number of laws still in effect today. The term "lawsuit" is used in reference to a civil acti ...
is entitled to have the court decide the merits of the dispute or of particular issues." There are a number of requirements that a plaintiff must establish to have standing before a federal court. Some are based on the
case or controversy The Supreme Court of the United States has interpreted the Case or Controversy Clause of Article III of the United States Constitution (found in Art. III, Section 2, Clause 1) as embodying two distinct limitations on exercise of judicial review: ...
requirement of the judicial power of
Article Three of the United States Constitution Article Three of the United States Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the U.S. federal government. Under Article Three, the judicial branch consists of the Supreme Court of the United States, as well as lower courts created by Congres ...
, § 2, cl.1. As stated there, "The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases . . . ndto Controversies . . ." The requirement that a plaintiff have standing to sue is a limit on the role of the judiciary and the law of Article III standing is built on the idea of separation of powers.. Federal courts may exercise power only "in the last resort, and as a necessity". The
American American(s) may refer to: * American, something of, from, or related to the United States of America, commonly known as the "United States" or "America" ** Americans, citizens and nationals of the United States of America ** American ancestry, pe ...
doctrine of standing is assumed as having begun with the case of '' Frothingham v. Mellon''.. However, legal standing truly rests its first prudential origins in '' Fairchild v. Hughes'', (1922) which was authored by Justice Louis Brandeis. In ''Fairchild'', a citizen sued the Secretary of State and the Attorney General to challenge the procedures by which the Nineteenth Amendment was ratified. Prior to it, the doctrine was that all persons had a right to pursue a private prosecution of a public right. Since then the doctrine has been embedded in judicial rules and some statutes. In 2011, in '' Bond v. United States'', the U.S. Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant charged with violating a federal statute does have standing to challenge the constitutionality of that statute under the Tenth Amendment.


Standing requirements

There are three standing requirements: # Injury-in-fact: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury—an invasion of a legally protected interest that is (a) concrete and particularized, and (b) actual or imminent (that is, neither conjectural nor hypothetical; not abstract). The injury can be either economic, non-economic, or both. # Causation: There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of, so that the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and not the result of the independent action of some third party who is not before the court. # Redressability: It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable court decision will redress the injury..


Prudential limitations

Additionally, there are three major prudential (judicially created) standing principles. Congress can override these principles via statute: # Prohibition of
third-party standing Third party standing is a term of the law of civil procedure that describes when one party may file a lawsuit or assert a defense in which the rights of third parties are asserted. In the United States, this is generally prohibited, as a party can ...
: A party may only assert his or her own rights and cannot raise the claims of a third party who is not before the court; exceptions exist where the third party has interchangeable economic interests with the injured party, or a person unprotected by a particular law sues to challenge the oversweeping of the law into the rights of others. For example, a party suing over a law prohibiting certain types of visual material, may sue because the
1st Amendment The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws that regulate an establishment of religion, or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, or abridge the freedom of speech, th ...
rights of theirs, and others engaged in similar displays, might be damaged.
 
Additionally, third parties who do not have standing may be able to sue under the
next friend In common law, a next friend (Law French ''prochein ami'') is a person who represents another person who is under age, or, because of disability or otherwise, is unable to maintain a suit on his or her own behalf and who does not have a legal gu ...
doctrine if the third party is an infant, mentally handicapped, or not a party to a contract. One example of a statutory exception to the prohibition of third party standing exists in the
qui tam In common law, a writ of ''qui tam'' is a writ through which private individuals who assist a prosecution can receive for themselves all or part of the damages or financial penalties recovered by the government as a result of the prosecution. Its ...
provision of the Civil
False Claims Act The False Claims Act (FCA), also called the "Lincoln Law", is an American federal law that imposes liability on persons and companies (typically federal contractors) who defraud governmental programs. It is the federal government's primary litigat ...
.. # Prohibition of generalized grievances: A plaintiff cannot sue if the injury is widely shared in an undifferentiated way with many people. For example, the general rule is that there is no federal taxpayer standing, as complaints about the spending of federal funds are too remote from the process of acquiring them. Such grievances are ordinarily more appropriately addressed in the representative branches. # Zone of interest test: There are in fact two tests used by the United States Supreme Court for the zone of interest ## Zone of injury: The injury is the kind of injury that Congress expected might be addressed under the statute. ## Zone of interests: The party is arguably within the zone of interest protected by the statute or constitutional provision.


Recent development of the doctrine

In 1984, the Supreme Court reviewed and further outlined the standing requirements in a major ruling concerning the meaning of the three standing requirements of injury, causation, and redressability. In the suit, parents of black public school children alleged that the Internal Revenue Service was not enforcing standards and procedures that would deny tax-exempt status to racially discriminatory private schools. The Court found that the plaintiffs did not have the standing necessary to bring suit.''Allen v. Wright'', 468 U.S. at 755 (1984). Although the Court established a significant injury for one of the claims, it found the causation of the injury (the nexus between the defendant's actions and the plaintiff's injuries) to be too attenuated. "The injury alleged was not fairly traceable to the Government conduct respondents challenge as unlawful". In another major standing case, '' Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife'', 504 U.S. 555 (1992), the Supreme Court elaborated on the redressability requirement for standing. The case involved a challenge to a rule promulgated by the
Secretary of the Interior Secretary of the Interior may refer to: * Secretary of the Interior (Mexico) * Interior Secretary of Pakistan * Secretary of the Interior and Local Government (Philippines) * United States Secretary of the Interior See also

*Interior ministry ...
interpreting §7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA or "The Act"; 16 U.S.C. § 1531 et seq.) is the primary law in the United States for protecting imperiled species. Designed to protect critically imperiled species from extinction as a "consequence of ec ...
(ESA). The rule rendered §7 of the ESA applicable only to actions within the United States or on the high seas. The Court found that the plaintiffs did not have the standing necessary to bring suit, because no injury had been established. The injury claimed by the plaintiffs was that damage would be caused to certain species of animals and that this in turn injures the plaintiffs by the reduced likelihood that the plaintiffs would see the species in the future. The court insisted though that the plaintiffs had to show how damage to the species would produce imminent injury to the plaintiffs. The Court found that the plaintiffs did not sustain this burden of proof. "The 'injury in fact' test requires more than an injury to a cognizable interest. It requires that the party seeking review be himself among the injured". The injury must be imminent and not hypothetical. Beyond failing to show injury, the Court found that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the standing requirement of redressability. The Court pointed out that the respondents chose to challenge a more generalized level of government action, "the invalidation of which would affect all overseas projects". This programmatic approach has "obvious difficulties insofar as proof of causation or redressability is concerned". In a 2000 case, ''Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States ex rel. Stevens'', 529 U.S. 765 (2000), the
United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point o ...
endorsed the "partial assignment" approach to
qui tam In common law, a writ of ''qui tam'' is a writ through which private individuals who assist a prosecution can receive for themselves all or part of the damages or financial penalties recovered by the government as a result of the prosecution. Its ...
relator standing to sue under the
False Claims Act The False Claims Act (FCA), also called the "Lincoln Law", is an American federal law that imposes liability on persons and companies (typically federal contractors) who defraud governmental programs. It is the federal government's primary litigat ...
— allowing private individuals to sue on behalf of the U.S. government for injuries suffered solely by the government.


Taxpayer standing

The initial case that established the doctrine of standing, '' Frothingham v. Mellon'', was a taxpayer standing case. Taxpayer standing is the concept that any person who pays taxes should have standing to file a
lawsuit - A lawsuit is a proceeding by a party or parties against another in the civil court of law. The archaic term "suit in law" is found in only a small number of laws still in effect today. The term "lawsuit" is used in reference to a civil actio ...
against the taxing body if that body allocates funds in a way that the
taxpayer A taxpayer is a person or organization (such as a company) subject to pay a tax. Modern taxpayers may have an identification number, a reference number issued by a government to citizens or firms. The term "taxpayer" generally characterizes o ...
feels is improper. The
United States Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all U.S. federal court cases, and over state court cases that involve a point o ...
has held that taxpayer standing is not by itself a sufficient basis for standing against the
United States government The federal government of the United States (U.S. federal government or U.S. government) is the national government of the United States, a federal republic located primarily in North America, composed of 50 states, a city within a fede ...
. The Court has consistently found that the conduct of the federal government is too far removed from individual taxpayer returns for any injury to the taxpayer to be traced to the use of tax revenues, e.g., '' United States v. Richardson.'' In '' DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno'', the Court extended this analysis to state governments as well. However, the Supreme Court has also held that taxpayer standing is constitutionally sufficient to sue a municipal government in a federal court. States are also protected against lawsuits by their
sovereign immunity Sovereign immunity, or crown immunity, is a legal doctrine whereby a sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution, strictly speaking in modern texts in its own courts. A similar, stronger ...
. Even where states waive their sovereign immunity, they may nonetheless have their own rules limiting standing against simple taxpayer standing against the state. Furthermore, states have the power to determine what will constitute standing for a litigant to be heard in a state court, and may deny access to the courts premised on taxpayer standing alone. in
California California is a U.S. state, state in the Western United States, located along the West Coast of the United States, Pacific Coast. With nearly 39.2million residents across a total area of approximately , it is the List of states and territori ...
, taxpayers have standing to sue for any 'illegal expenditure of, waste of, or injury to the estate, funds, or other property of a local agency'. In
Florida Florida is a state located in the Southeastern region of the United States. Florida is bordered to the west by the Gulf of Mexico, to the northwest by Alabama, to the north by Georgia, to the east by the Bahamas and Atlantic Ocean, and to ...
, a taxpayer has standing to sue if the state government is acting unconstitutionally with respect to public funds, or if government action is causing some special injury to the taxpayer that is not shared by taxpayers in general. In
Virginia Virginia, officially the Commonwealth of Virginia, is a state in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern regions of the United States, between the Atlantic Coast and the Appalachian Mountains. The geography and climate of the Commonwealth ar ...
, the Supreme Court of Virginia has more or less adopted a similar rule. An individual taxpayer generally has standing to challenge an act of a city or county where they live, but does not have general standing to challenge state expenditures.


Standing to challenge statutes

With limited exceptions, a party cannot have standing to challenge the constitutionality of a statute unless he will be subjected to the provisions of that statute. There are some exceptions, however; for example, courts will accept
First Amendment First or 1st is the ordinal form of the number one (#1). First or 1st may also refer to: *World record, specifically the first instance of a particular achievement Arts and media Music * 1$T, American rapper, singer-songwriter, DJ, and reco ...
challenges to a statute on overbreadth grounds, where a person who is only partially affected by a statute can challenge the parts that do not affect him on the grounds that laws that restrict speech have a
chilling effect In a legal context, a chilling effect is the inhibition or discouragement of the legitimate exercise of natural and legal rights by the threat of legal sanction. A chilling effect may be caused by legal actions such as the passing of a law, the ...
on other people's right to free speech. The only other way someone can have standing to challenge the constitutionality of a statute is if the existence of the statute would otherwise deprive him of a right or a privilege even if the statute itself would not apply to him. The Virginia Supreme Court made this point clear in the case of '' Martin v. Ziherl'' 607 S.E.2d 367 (Va. 2005). Martin and Ziherl were girlfriend and boyfriend and engaged in unprotected sexual intercourse when Martin discovered that Ziherl had infected her with
herpes Herpes simplex is a viral infection caused by the herpes simplex virus. Infections are categorized based on the part of the body infected. Oral herpes involves the face or mouth. It may result in small blisters in groups often called cold ...
, even though he knew he was infected and did not inform her of this. She sued him for damages, but because it was illegal (at the time the case was filed) to commit "fornication" (sexual intercourse between a man and a woman who are not married), Ziherl argued that Martin could not sue him because joint tortfeasors – those involved in committing a crime – cannot sue each other over acts occurring as a result of a criminal act (''Zysk v. Zysk'', 404 S.E.2d 721 (Va. 1990)). Martin argued in rebuttal that because of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in ''
Lawrence v. Texas ''Lawrence v. Texas'', 539 U.S. 558 (2003), is a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that most sanctions of criminal punishment for consensual, adult non- procreative sexual activity (commonly referred to as so ...
'' (finding that state's sodomy law unconstitutional), Virginia's anti-fornication law was also unconstitutional for the reasons cited in Lawrence. Martin argued, therefore, she could, in fact, sue Ziherl for damages. Lower courts decided that because the Commonwealth's Attorney does not prosecute fornication cases and no one had been prosecuted for fornication anywhere in Virginia in over 100 years, Martin had no risk of prosecution and thus lacked standing to challenge the statute. Martin appealed. Since Martin had something to lose – the ability to sue Ziherl for damages – if the statute was upheld, she had standing to challenge the constitutionality of the statute even though the possibility of her being prosecuted for violating it was zero. Since the U.S. Supreme Court in ''Lawrence'' had found that there is a privacy right in one's private, noncommercial sexual practices, the Virginia Supreme Court decided that the statute against fornication was unconstitutional. The finding gave Martin standing to sue Ziherl since the decision in ''Zysk'' was no longer applicable. However, the only reason Martin had standing to challenge the statute was that she had something to lose if it stayed on the books.


Ballot measures

In '' Hollingsworth v. Perry'', the Supreme Court ruled that being the proponents of a ballot measure is not by itself enough to confer legal standing. In that case,
Proposition 8 Proposition 8, known informally as Prop 8, was a California ballot proposition and a state constitutional amendment intended to ban same-sex marriage; it passed in the November 2008 California state elections and was later overturned in cou ...
had banned same-sex marriage in California, a ban that was ruled unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled that the proponents of Proposition 8 has no standing in court since they failed to show that they were harmed by the decision.


State law

State law on standing differs substantially from federal law and varies considerably from state to state.


California

Californians may bring "
taxpayer A taxpayer is a person or organization (such as a company) subject to pay a tax. Modern taxpayers may have an identification number, a reference number issued by a government to citizens or firms. The term "taxpayer" generally characterizes o ...
actions" against public officials for wasting public funds through mismanagement of a government agency, where the relief sought is an order compelling the official not to waste money and fulfill his duty to protect the public fisc.See, e.g., ''Humane Society of the United States v. State Bd. of Equalization''
152 Cal. App. 4th 349
(2007).
On December 29, 2009, the
California Court of Appeal The California Courts of Appeal are the state intermediate appellate courts in the U.S. state of California. The state is geographically divided along county lines into six appellate districts.
for the Sixth District ruled that California Code of Civil Procedure Section 367 cannot be read as imposing a federal-style standing doctrine on California's code pleading system of civil procedure. In California, the fundamental inquiry is ''always'' whether the plaintiff has sufficiently plead a cause of action, not whether the plaintiff has some entitlement to judicial action separate from proof of the substantive merits of the claim advanced. The court acknowledged that the word "standing" is often sloppily used to refer to what is really '' jus tertii'', and held that ''jus tertii'' in state law is not the same thing as the federal standing doctrine.


See also

* Injunction *
Merit Merit may refer to: Religion * Merit (Christianity) * Merit (Buddhism) * Punya (Hinduism) * Imputed righteousness in Reformed Christianity Companies and brands * Merit (cigarette), a brand of cigarettes made by Altria * Merit Energy Company, ...
*
Actio popularis An ''actio popularis'' was an action in Roman penal law brought by a member of the public in the interest of public order. The action exists in some modern legal systems. For example, in Spain, an ''actio popularis'' was accepted by Judge Garzó ...
*
List of United States Supreme Court cases involving standing A number of United States Supreme Court opinions have been important for their development of the doctrine of legal standing in the context of federal law in the United States. Some of those opinions include: References {{SCOTUScaselists ...


References


External links


Article on the history of standing in Canada
{{DEFAULTSORT:Standing (Law) Legal doctrines and principles