While on the whole, legal standing is a good doctrine and litmus test, when it comes to laws and practices such as these, I cannot help but think we need to advocate for change to interpreting the validity of the case and the need to adjudicate on constitutional questions through legal standing alone.
This is off the cuff, but I find it very unhelpful when the Congress and President can enact and execute laws that cannot be questioned in the courts by concerned citizens unless they have been or can arguably prove legal standing. Challenging the constitutionality of laws should not require that one's rights and liberty be violated beforehand.
While on the whole, legal standing is a good doctrine and litmus test, when it comes to laws and practices such as these, I cannot help but think we need to advocate for change to interpreting the validity of the case and the need to adjudicate on constitutional questions through legal standing alone.
This is off the cuff, but I find it very unhelpful when the Congress and President can enact and execute laws that cannot be questioned in the courts by concerned citizens unless they have been or can arguably prove legal standing. Challenging the constitutionality of laws should not require that one's rights and liberty be violated beforehand.