ACLU-NJ ex rel. Miller v. Twp. of Wall

From Conservapedia
This is the current revision of ACLU-NJ ex rel. Miller v. Twp. of Wall as edited by DavidB4-bot (Talk | contribs) at 00:46, July 13, 2016. This URL is a permanent link to this version of this page.

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

In ACLU-NJ ex rel. Miller v. Twp. of Wall, 246 F.3d 258 (3d Cir. 2001), future Justice Samuel Alito wrote for a unanimous panel of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit that plaintiffs lacked taxpayer standing to challenge a Christmas and Hanukkah display when the municipal expenditure was de minimis (very small), and plaintiffs lacked non-economic standing when there was lack of proof of actually seeing the display at issue.

Justice Alito relied heavily on an expansive view of the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc., in dismissing an Establishment Clause case for lack of standing.

Judges Nygaard and Rosenn joined this opinion, which has been given increased significance in light of Justice Alito's role on the U.S. Supreme Court.