The Problem of Standing

Jan G. Laitos

in The Right of Nonuse

Published in print May 2012 | ISBN: 9780195386066
Published online September 2012 | e-ISBN: 9780199949656 | DOI:
The Problem of Standing

Show Summary Details


This chapter seeks to establish that, in the United States, a standing test for natural resource protection should not necessarily be based only in terms of an injury to a human being. In federal courts, the Article III “case or controversy” requirement has demanded that the judiciary be confronted with an injury that is experienced by a human (or a “person”) before a right can be asserted. In state courts there is a similar anthropocentric bias for plaintiffs that are human, and who have been injured. Rather than require humans to demonstrate their uniquely human injury in order to raise the rights of a natural resource, it should be acceptable for a natural resource to allege that its own cognizable right of nonuse has been violated, and to show that it (and not a human) has suffered an injury-in-fact, which in turn permits it to assert its rights in court.

Keywords: resource protection; standing test; rights of nonuse; United States; injury

Chapter.  8097 words. 

Subjects: Environment and Energy Law

Full text: subscription required

How to subscribe Recommend to my Librarian

Buy this work at Oxford University Press »

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.