Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/23-235_n7ip.pdf
Page Number: 11.0

Cite as:  602 U. S. ____ (2024) 

7 

Opinion of the Court 

Stop  the  War,  418  U. S.  208,  227  (1974);  Richardson,  418 
U. S., at 175; Tyler v. Judges of Court of Registration, 179 
U. S. 405, 406 (1900).  Standing also “tends to assure that
the legal questions presented to the court will be resolved, 
not in the rarified atmosphere of a debating society, but in 
a  concrete  factual  context  conducive  to  a  realistic 
appreciation of the consequences of judicial action.”  Valley 
Forge, 454 U. S., at 472.  Moreover, the standing doctrine
serves  to  protect  the  “autonomy”  of  those  who  are  most 
directly affected so that they can decide whether and how 
to challenge the defendant’s action.  Id., at 473. 

By  limiting  who  can  sue,  the  standing  requirement
implements  “the  Framers’  concept  of  the  proper—and
properly limited—role of the courts in a democratic society.”
J.  Roberts,  Article  III  Limits  on  Statutory  Standing,  42
Duke L. J. 1219, 1220 (1993) (quotation marks omitted).  In 
particular,  the  standing  requirement  means  that  the
federal  courts  decide  some  contested  legal  questions  later 
rather than sooner, thereby allowing issues to percolate and 
potentially  be  resolved  by  the  political  branches  in  the 
democratic process.  See Raines v. Byrd, 521 U. S. 811, 829– 
830 (1997); cf. Clapper v. Amnesty Int’l USA, 568 U. S. 398, 
420–422 (2013).  And the standing requirement means that 
the federal courts may never need to decide some contested 
legal  questions:  “Our  system  of  government  leaves  many 
crucial  decisions  to  the  political  processes,”  where 
democratic debate can occur and a wide variety of interests 
and views can be weighed.  Schlesinger, 418 U. S., at 227; 
see Campbell v. Clinton, 203 F. 3d 19, 23 (CADC 2000). 

A 
The fundamentals of standing are well-known and firmly 
rooted  in  American  constitutional  law.  To  establish 
standing,  as  this  Court  has  often  stated,  a  plaintiff  must
demonstrate (i) that she has suffered or likely will suffer an 
injury in fact, (ii) that the injury likely was caused or will