Terri Simmons v. Bryan Steele

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the “generalized interest of all citizens in constitutional governance . . . is an abstract injury” that is an insufficient basis for standing
• holding that plaintiffs lacked standing as citizens to sue because claim implicated only generalized interest of all citizens
• concluding that the “generalized interest of all citizens in constitutional governance” does not support Article III standing
• holding that the \generalized interest of all citizens in constitutional governance ... is an abstract injury\ that is an insufficient basis for standing
• holding that taxpayers lacked standing to challenge, under the Incompatibility Clause of Article I, § 6, the practice of members of Congress serving in the military reserves
• holding that an anti-war group did not have standing to invoke the Incompatibility Clause, art. II, § 6, cl. 2, to have members of Congress stricken from the Armed Forces Reserve List

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).