Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2015
Abstract
This essay offers an exercise in wishful jurisdictional and procedural thinking. As part of a Supreme Court Roundtable on Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, it argues for William Fletcher's conception of standing as an inquiry into the substantive merits of a claim and of whether the plaintiff has a valid cause of action. This approach is especially necessary in statutory cases; along with its constitutional power to create new rights, duties, and remedies, Congress should have a free hand in deciding who and how those rights and duties should be enforced. Spokeo, which involves a claim for damages for publication of allegedly false consumer-credit information in violation of a federal statute, illustrates the wisdom and benefits of Fletcher's approach.
Recommended Citation
Howard Wasserman,
Fletcherian Standing, Merits, and Spokeo v. Robins
, 68 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 257
(2015).
Available at: https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/faculty_publications/196
