Standing on Its Last Legs: Bennett v. Spear and the Past and Future of Standing in Environmental Cases

This Article examines the evolution of standing in environmental disputes. The Article traces environmental standing from the 1970s when the zone of interests test was first applied in Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp, through Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife over twenty years later, which outlined the three requirements of concrete and particularized imminent injury, traceability, and redressibility. The Article then describes how Bennett v. Spear, decided by the Supreme Court in1997, and other recent lower court decisions have produced a haphazard and incoherent approach to standing in cases involving the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Finally, the Article suggests that because of these inconsistencies, the law of environmental standing cannot last in its current form and should be reconsidered by the Supreme Court