Article III's Constitutional Minimum for Standing

Standing requirements answer the question who may litigate a constitutional question--who is able to show a case or controversy under Article III. In other words, federal judicial review is limited to "deciding ordinary litigation between adverse parties." Casebook p. 63.

Federal courts do not have the power to decide issues, or questions of federal law, or to issue advisory opinions concerning federal law. Their jurisdiction is limited to actual cases or controversies. If there is no case or controversy, federal courts are without jurisdiction and will dismiss the case.

One commentator nicely summarizes the case or controversy requirement:

"In order to establish standing, a plaintiff must show three things:

* injury in fact
* causation; and,
* redressability.

With respect to each of these elements, the plaintiff bears the burden of pleading and proof. It is also important to note that where a plaintiff"s complaint seeks several different forms of relief, plaintiff must separately establish standing as to each of these claims. This may mean, for example, that while a plaintiff has suffered a sufficient past injury to give her standing on a claim for damages, any threatened future injury may be too speculative or remote to give plaintiff standing to seek prospective injunctive relief."