A polemic against the standing requirement in constitutional cases
Article
Patrick, Jeremy. 2013. "A polemic against the standing requirement in constitutional cases." Capital University Law Review. 41, pp. 603-635.
| Article Title | A polemic against the standing requirement in constitutional cases |
|---|---|
| ERA Journal ID | 33168 |
| Article Category | Article |
| Authors | |
| Author | Patrick, Jeremy |
| Journal Title | Capital University Law Review |
| Journal Citation | 41, pp. 603-635 |
| Number of Pages | 33 |
| Year | 2013 |
| Place of Publication | Columbus, OH. United States |
| ISSN | 0198-9693 |
| Web Address (URL) | http://law.capital.edu/lawreview/ |
| Abstract | This article argues that, in constitutional cases, the standing requirement should be flatly abolished. The primary flaw with standing doctrine is that renders large swathes of the Constitution functionally worthless, contrary to the clear intention of the text and the structure of the document itself, as well as the intentions of those who drafted and ratified it. Further, standing doctrine lacks textual support, historical support, a role in maintaining the separation of powers, or any other practical necessity to warrant its retention. |
| Keywords | Standing, Justiciability, Constitution, Injury |
| ANZSRC Field of Research 2020 | 480702. Constitutional law |
| 480410. Legal theory, jurisprudence and legal interpretation | |
| 480501. Access to justice | |
| Public Notes | Copyright 2013 Thomson Reuters. |
| Byline Affiliations | School of Law |
| Institution of Origin | University of Southern Queensland |
Permalink -
https://research.usq.edu.au/item/q223y/a-polemic-against-the-standing-requirement-in-constitutional-cases
1866
total views9
total downloads0
views this month0
downloads this month