The standing doctrine is an evolving judicial tool to limit cases in the courtroom. However, the issue of how citizens are granted standing in environmental litigation remains unclear. This thesis will analyze the evolution of the standing doctrine and the requirements for future environmental litigation through an analysis of the more prominent cases that set the historical precedent. Particularly, this thesis is focused through the lens of climate change and the additional hurdles its standing requirements can bring to litigation brought by individual citizens. Jurisdiction has become a very complex issue in climate change lawsuits. While at first glance it may seem that causation is the largest obstacle for climate change plaintiffs, injury is equally difficult to prove. This thesis looks at the use of present and future injury in addressing the requirements for standing, as well as whether the injury can be redressed by the courts. Standing, which is a threshold issue for any court, has been limited to past harm. However, looking at issues regarding climate change requires the court to consider how the present impacts the future of litigation. Climate change litigation brings a new angle to these debates and will force the courts to reevaluate their previous conclusions.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ucf.edu/oai:stars.library.ucf.edu:honorstheses1990-2015-2029 |
| Date | 01 January 2010 |
| Creators | Murphy, Michelle D. |
| Publisher | STARS |
| Source Sets | University of Central Florida |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Source | HIM 1990-2015 |
Page generated in 0.0626 seconds