A polemic against the standing requirement in constitutional cases
Article
| 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 | 
https://research.usq.edu.au/item/q223y/a-polemic-against-the-standing-requirement-in-constitutional-cases
- 1920total views
- 9total downloads
- 4views this month
- 0downloads this month