Changes

In ''Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA'', the 5-4 [[U.S. Supreme Court]] held that [[standing]] did not exist to challenge the [[NSA]]'s eavesdropping program.

In ''Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA'', the 5-4 [[U.S. Supreme Court]] held that [[standing]] did not exist to challenge the [[NSA]]'s eavesdropping program.  Justice [[Sam Alito]] wrote the court majority opinion, as joined by Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas.

The Court held that the standing inquiry is particularly rigorous when reaching the merits of the dispute "would force [the Court] to decide whether an action taken by one of the other two branches of the Federal Government was unconstitutional." 133 S. Ct. 1138, 1147 (2013) (quoting ''Raines v. Byrd'', 521 U.S. 811, 819-20 (1997)).

The Court held that the standing inquiry is particularly rigorous when reaching the merits of the dispute "would force [the Court] to decide whether an action taken by one of the other two branches of the Federal Government was unconstitutional." 133 S. Ct. 1138, 1147 (2013) (quoting ''Raines v. Byrd'', 521 U.S. 811, 819-20 (1997)).

[[category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]

[[category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]