Citation network
Lujan Vs. Defenders of Wildlife
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 12, 1992
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
-
Lujan v. DefendersSearch
-
Of Wildlife - 504 U.S. 555 (1992) October Term, 1991 Syllabus Lujan, Secretary of the Interior V. DefendersSearch
-
members would thereby be directly affected apart from the members' special interest in the subject. See Sierra Club v. MortonSearch
-
even if the activity is located far away from the area of their use is inconsistent with this Court's opinion in Lujan v. NationalSearch
-
a threatened concrete interest of his own, does not state an Article III case or controversy. See, e. g., Fairchild v. HughesSearch
-
seeks to protect species of animals against threats to their continuing existence caused by man. See generally TVA v. HillSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
The District Court granted the Secretary's motion to dismiss for lack of standing. Defenders of Wildlife v. HodelSearch
-
Minn. 1987). The Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed by a divided vote. Defenders of Wildlife v. HodelSearch
-
granted respondents' merits motion, and ordered the Secretary to publish a revised regulation. Defenders of Wildlife v. HodelSearch
-
standing is an essential and unchanging part of the case-or-controversy requirement of Article III. See, e. g., Allen v. WrightSearch
-
Whitmore, supra, at 155 (quoting Los Angeles v. LyonsSearch
-
Simon v. EasternSearch
-
PBS, Inc. v. DallasSearch
-
i. e., with the manner and degree of evidence required at the successive stages of the litigation. See Lujan v. NationalSearch
-
Gladstone, Realtors v. VillageSearch
-
ASARCO Inc. v. KadishSearch
-
purposes, is undeniably a cognizable interest for purpose of 563 standing. See, e. g., Sierra Club v. MortonSearch
-
Id., at 735, 739. See generally Hunt v. WashingtonSearch
-
Lyons, 461 U. S., at 102 (quoting O'Shea v. LittletonSearch
-
Los Angeles v. LyonsSearch
-
United States v. StudentsSearch
-
that 567 might have been the subject of his interest will no longer exist, see Japan Whaling Assn. v. AmericanSearch
-
Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-LarrainSearch
-
unconnected to the plaintiff's own concrete harm. Its suggestion that we did so in Japan Whaling Assn. v. AmericanSearch
-
Cetacean Soc., 478 U. S. 221 (1986), and Robertson v. MethowSearch
-
was to occur, so that its members would obviously be concretely affected, see Methow Valley Citizens Council v. RegionalSearch
-
him than it does the public at large-does not state an Article III case or controversy. For example, in Fairchild v. HughesSearch
-
Ibid. In Massachusetts v. MellonSearch
-
U. S., at 634. See also Doremus v. BoardSearch
-
dismissing taxpayer action on the basis of Mellon). More recent cases are to the same effect. In United States v. RichardsonSearch
-
Richardson, supra, at 171, 176-177. And in Schlesinger v. ReservistsSearch
-
Valley Forge Christian College v. AmericansSearch
-
as Chief Justice Marshall said in Marbury v. MadisonSearch
-
Massachusetts v. MellonSearch
-
Allen, supra, at 760 (quoting Laird v. TatumSearch
-
Warth, 422 U. S., at 500 (quoting Linda R. S. v. RichardSearch
-
law (namely, injury to an individual's personal interest in living in a racially integrated community, see Trafficante v. MetropolitanSearch
-
and injury to a company's interest in marketing its product free from competition, see Hardin v. KentuckySearch
-
a case where it is reasonable to assume that the affiants will be using the sites on a regular basis, see Sierra Club v. MortonSearch
-
a nexus theory similar to those proffered here might support a claim to standing. See Japan Whaling Assn. v. AmericanSearch
-
Syllabus Lujan, Secretary of the Interior V. DefendersSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial