Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Warth Vs. Seldin

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 25, 1975

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

73 entries 10 linked 63 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Richardson US Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1974
  2. Sierra Club Vs. Morton US Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1972
  3. O'Shea Vs. Littleton US Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1974
  4. United States Vs. Scrap US Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1973
  5. Griswold Vs. Connecticut US Supreme Court · Jun 07, 1965
  6. Barrows Vs. Jackson US Supreme Court · Jun 15, 1953
  7. Naacp Vs. Alabama US Supreme Court · Jun 08, 1959
  8. Flast Vs. Cohen US Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1968
  9. Doe Vs. Bolton US Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1973
  10. United Public Workers Vs. Mitchell US Supreme Court · Feb 10, 1947
  11. U.S. 490 (1975) U.S. Supreme Court Warth v. Seldin
    Search
  12. U.S. 490 (1975) Warth v. Seldin
    Search
  13. of a showing of any exception allowing such a claim, to raise the putative rights of third parties. Trafficante v. Metropolitan
    Search
  14. constitutional limitations on federal court jurisdiction and prudential limitations on its exercise. E.g., Barrows v. Jackson
    Search
  15. in concern about the proper -- and properly limited -- role of the courts in a democratic society. See Schlesinger v. Reservists
    Search
  16. jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court's remedial powers on Page 422 U. S. 499 his behalf. Baker v. Carr
    Search
  17. Linda R. S. v. Richard
    Search
  18. D., 410 U. S. 614 , 410 U. S. 617 (1973). See Data Processing Service v. Camp
    Search
  19. or a large class of citizens, that harm alone normally does not warrant exercise of jurisdiction. E.g., Schlesinger v. Reservists
    Search
  20. and interests, and cannot rest his claim to relief on the legal rights or interests of third parties. E.g., Tileston v. Ullman
    Search
  21. U. S. 44 (1943). See United States v. Raines
    Search
  22. Barrows v. Page
    Search
  23. and even though judicial intervention may be unnecessary to protect individual rights. See, e.g., Schlesinger v. Reservists
    Search
  24. standing in no way depends on the merits of the plaintiff's contention that particular conduct is illegal, e.g., Flast v. Cohen
    Search
  25. See Linda R. S. v. Richard
    Search
  26. judicial power when the plaintiff's claim to relief rests on the legal rights of third parties. See United States v. Raines
    Search
  27. that the constitutional or statutory provision in question implies a right of action in the plaintiff. See Pierce v. Society
    Search
  28. Sullivan v. Little
    Search
  29. injury to himself, even if it is an injury shared by a large class of other possible litigants. E.g., United States v. SCRAP
    Search
  30. interests of others, and, indeed, may invoke the general public interest in support of their claim. E.g., Sierra Club v. Morton
    Search
  31. FCC v. Sanders
    Search
  32. allegations of the complaint, and must construe the complaint in favor of the complaining party. E.g., Jenkins v. McKeithen
    Search
  33. U. S. 488 , 414 U. S. 494 (1974). See, e.g., Bailey v. Patterson
    Search
  34. that, if the court affords the relief requested, the asserted inability of petitioners will be removed. Linda R. S. v. Richard
    Search
  35. of the injury does not necessarily deprive the person harmed of standing to vindicate his rights. E.g., Roe v. Wade
    Search
  36. Schlesinger v. Reservists
    Search
  37. restriction against the litigant would result indirectly in the violation of third parties' rights. See, e.g., Doe v. Bolton
    Search
  38. affect a relationship existing between them and the persons whose rights assertedly are violated. E.g., Sullivan v. Little
    Search
  39. Pierce v. Society
    Search
  40. members, at least so long as the challenged infractions adversely affect its members' associational ties. E.g., NAACP v. Alabama
    Search
  41. Anti-Fascist Committee v. McGrath
    Search
  42. an association may have standing solely as the representative of its members. E.g., National Motor Freight Assn. v. United
    Search
  43. however, does not eliminate or attenuate the constitutional requirement of a case or controversy. See Sierra Club v. Morton
    Search
  44. of the benefits of living in a racially and ethnically integrated community. Referring to our decision in Trafficante v. Metropolitan
    Search
  45. even where the plaintiff would have suffered no judicially cognizable injury in the absence of statute. Linda R. S. v. Richard
    Search
  46. D., 410 U.S. at 410 U. S. 617 n. 3, citing Trafficante v. Metropolitan
    Search
  47. the association must show that it has suffered harm, or that one or more of its members are injured. E.g., Sierra Club v. Morton
    Search
  48. associations to represent their members, the relief sought has been of this kind. E.g., National Motor Freight Assn. v. United
    Search
  49. States, 372 U. S. 246 (1963). See Data Processing Service v. Camp
    Search
  50. to its members of sufficient immediacy and ripeness to warrant judicial intervention. See, e.g., United Public Workers v. Mitchell
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial