You may have heard this term used lately, usually in reference to Congress: we don't have "standing" in the courts....
Bear with me while I explain that term so I can connect it to what will happen at the Supreme Court level to states whose Attorneys General have refused or will refuse to defend their Constitution in lower courts:
Standing and Legal Definition
Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.
Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Otherwise, the court will rule that you "lack standing" to bring the suit and dismiss your case.
There are three constitutional requirements to prove standing:
- Injury: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury. The injury must not be abstract and must be within the zone of interests meant to be regulated or protected under the statutory or constitutional guarantee in question.
- Causation: The injury must be reasonably connected to the defendant’s conduct.
- Redressability: A favorable court decision must be likely to redress the injury.
- 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.
- A plaintiff cannot sue as a taxpayer who shares a grievance in common with all other taxpayers.