A Supreme Court ruling on this doctrine was decisive in a case in which plaintiffs sought to enjoin the Burnt Ridge Project, a Forest Service initiative that allowed the salvage sale of timber on 238 acres damaged by fire.
A Supreme Court ruling on this doctrine was decisive in a case in which plaintiffs sought to enjoin the Burnt Ridge Project, a Forest Service initiative that allowed the salvage sale of timber on 238 acres damaged by fire. That decision, Summers v. Earth Island Institute, drew heavily from a 1992 case in which this doctrine stopped plaintiffs from applying the Endangered Species Act to development projects abroad. The two-part Flast test allows this requirement to be met in the taxpayer context only if unconstitutionality is alleged under Article I, Section 8. This requirement arises from Article (*) III, and was critical to the defendants' victories in both Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife and the 1923 case that first established it, Frothingham v. Mellon. Third parties cannot sue because of this doctrine, which is satisfied when the plaintiff shows injury-in-fact, causation, and redressability. For10 points, name this legal requirement that establishes a party's right to have the merits of a lawsuit heard in court. 
A Supreme Court ruling on this doctrine was decisive in a case in which plaintiffs sought to enjoin the Burnt Ridge Project, a Forest Service initiative that allowed the salvage sale of timber on 238 acres damaged by fire.
standing [or  locus standi]