Graduation Year
2025
Graduation Month
May
Document Type
Thesis
Degree Name
Bachelor of Arts
School or Department
Philosophy
Major
Philosophy
Faculty Mentor Department
Philosophy
Faculty Mentor
Soazig Le Bihan
Faculty Reader(s)
Soazig Le Bihan
Keywords
Standing, Standing Doctrine, Environmental Law, Injuries, Federal Court, Supreme Court
Subject Categories
Environmental Law
Abstract
Controversies over issues of standing in federal civil litigation are hotly contested, as they strike at the heart of separation of powers issues and broader notions of the intent of civil action. Here I identify two competing theories of the purpose of standing and its requirements as such. Restrictive standing, as argued by Professor Ann Woolhandler, seeks to inherently link civil redress with an injury-in-fact requirement for both public and private law claims. Expansive standing, as argued by Professor Cass R. Sunstein, seeks to ground civil redress largely within violations of Congressionally designated causes of action. I argue that the current interpretation by the Supreme Court of standing doctrine largely in accordance with a more restrictive view has left environmental litigation in a particularly dangerous place, as the often collective and diffuse injuries that are the subject of such litigation frequently fail to neatly match the requirements crafted by the Court. In this paper, I will specifically situate the needs of environmental litigation within this discourse over standing doctrine, asserting that the expansive standing position and its dependence upon Congressionally designated causes of action is best able to accommodate the often multifaceted nature of environmental litigation.
Honors College Research Project
1
GLI Capstone Project
no
Recommended Citation
Balius, Wyatt, "Situating Standing in Environmental Litigation" (2025). Undergraduate Theses, Professional Papers, and Capstone Artifacts. 568.
https://scholarworks.umt.edu/utpp/568
Included in
© Copyright 2025 Wyatt Balius