Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Summers V. Earth Island Institute Rejects Probabilistic Standing, But A 'Realistic Threat' Of Harm Is A Better Standing Test, Bradford Mank
Summers V. Earth Island Institute Rejects Probabilistic Standing, But A 'Realistic Threat' Of Harm Is A Better Standing Test, Bradford Mank
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
In Summers v. Earth Island Institute, the Supreme Court recently rejected Justice Breyer’s dissenting opinion’s proposed test for organizational standing based upon the statistical probability that some of an organization’s members will likely be harmed in the near future by a defendant’s allegedly illegal actions. Implicitly, however, the Court had recognized some form of probabilistic standing in Friends of the Earth v. Laidlaw, which found standing where plaintiffs avoid recreational activities because of “reasonable concerns” about future health injuries from pollution; Summers did not overrule Laidlaw. There is an inherent tension between the Summers and Laidlaw decisions. This Article applies …
Revisiting The Lyons Den: Summers V. Earth Island Institute's Misuse Of Lyons's Realistic Threat Of Harm Standing Test, Bradford Mank
Revisiting The Lyons Den: Summers V. Earth Island Institute's Misuse Of Lyons's Realistic Threat Of Harm Standing Test, Bradford Mank
Faculty Articles and Other Publications
In Summers v. Earth Island Institute, 129 S. Ct. 1142 (2009), the majority and dissenting opinions disagreed about how to apply the “realistic threat” test set forth in Los Angeles v. Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 107 (1983)). According to Justice Scalia’s majority opinion in Summers, the plaintiff organizations did not have standing to obtain injunctive relief because they failed to prove that their members were likely in the near future to hike on government land on which the Forest Service conducted allegedly illegal sales of timber without public notice and comment and that the facts alleged by …