Skip to main content
Article
Fletcherian Standing, Merits, and Spokeo v. Robins
Vand. L. Rev. En Banc
  • Howard Wasserman, Florida International University College of Law
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
1-1-2015
Disciplines
Abstract

This essay offers an exercise in wishful jurisdictional and procedural thinking. As part of a Supreme Court Roundtable on Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, it argues for William Fletcher's conception of standing as an inquiry into the substantive merits of a claim and of whether the plaintiff has a valid cause of action. This approach is especially necessary in statutory cases; along with its constitutional power to create new rights, duties, and remedies, Congress should have a free hand in deciding who and how those rights and duties should be enforced. Spokeo, which involves a claim for damages for publication of allegedly false consumer-credit information in violation of a federal statute, illustrates the wisdom and benefits of Fletcher's approach.

Citation Information
Howard Wasserman. "Fletcherian Standing, Merits, and Spokeo v. Robins" Vand. L. Rev. En Banc Vol. 68 (2015) p. 257
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/howard_wasserman/60/