Some environmental activists, impatient with legislative processes, sought relief from the Supreme Court. In 1992, the SCOTUS was like naw. There are other negative externalities that could be challenged in the courts, but my sense is that the SCOTUS repeatedly tells these people, "Do work in the legislature or gtfo." And they're not wrong per se. But then the conversation winds all the way back to our favorite topic on hubski: monied influence trumps a disorganized and apathetic population, and we need campaign finance reform.The fact that you will never get a legislature to move as quickly as a corporate board is, to Milton Friedman, proof that your society doesn't actually want clean air or charity all that much.
Holding: Plaintiffs did not have standing to bring suit under the Endangered Species Act, because the threat of a species' extinction alone did not establish an individual and nonspeculative private injury.