Notice & Comment

D.C. Circuit Review – Reviewed: More Standing

A year ago I wrote a post called Standing. In that post, I suggested that “the law professors suing President Trump about the Emoluments Clause ‘pretty clearly lack Article III standing.’”  Well, today, we learned for a fact that the members of Congress who sued President Trump about the Emoluments Clause lack standing.

Here is how the opinion (per curiam, Judges Henderson, Tatel, and Griffith) Blumenthal v. Trump begins:

And then this*:

This is a pretty big case so perhaps there will be a cert petition or a request for rehearing. But establishing standing is going to be really tricky.

If that isn’t enough standing for your taste, the D.C. Circuit issued another standing opinion this week: Narragansett Indian Tribal Historic Preservation Office v. FERC. Here is how it begins:

Unfortunately for the Tribe, though, it also has no standing to seek relief:

And that, apart from denial of rehearing in the net neutrality wars, is the week in the D.C. Circuit.

* The panel went out of its way to say that it was not deciding how Raines may apply in other circumstances, which may be a reference to this currently pending litigation. My sense from that oral argument is that someone — either the majority or the dissent — will rely heavily on Raines. But we’ll see.

D.C. Circuit Review – Reviewed is designed to help you keep track of the nation’s “second most important court” in just five minutes a week.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email