In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court held that environmentalists’ lacked standing to challenge a Forest Service regulation limiting public involvement in timber sales decisions. Priscilla Summers v. Earth Island Institute, et al.,__U.S.__(No. 07-463, March 3, 2009).
The decision found that respondents’ argument that they have standing because they suffered procedural injuryi.e., they have been denied the ability to file comments on some Forest Service actions—fails because such a deprivation without some concrete interest affected thereby is insufficient to create Article III standing.
Justice Scalia, writing for the majority, stated “Accepting an intention to visit the National Forests as adequate to confer standing to challenge any Government action affecting any portion of those forests would be tantamount to eliminating the requirement of concrete, particularized injury in fact.”
The following is a link to the Court’s opinion: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-463.pdf
See: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Case Heads to Supreme Court
