In order to sue in federal court, a plaintiff must have “standing,” an actual or imminent concrete and particularized injury in fact caused by the defendant and redressable by a federal court. Many lawsuits are thrown out for lack of standing. In particular, and of particular relevance in election cases, many law students are thrown out because the plaintiffs allege a “generalized grievance,” an injury shared in common with the public and not “particularized.” In federal court, an increasing number of plaintiffs have been non-profit organizations alleging a distinct harm to them, and they have survived the standing inquiry.
But the Supreme Court’s decision today in Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine might have just disrupted this litigation path in election cases.
Continue reading Could the Court’s unanimous decision in FDA v. AHM upend some federal election litigation?