| Venue: | SCOTUS |
| Facts: | The Forest Service has a plan for the development of Mineral King Valley (big Disney hotel for skiers). The Sierra Club wants it preserved for hikers. |
| Posture: | Disney/Forest Service have won everything so far: public hearing denied, correspondence with Dept. of Interior ignored, suit in lower court. |
| Issue: | What must be alleged by persons who claim noneconomic injuries in order to have a legitimate lawsuit? |
| Holding: | A mere "interest in the problem" is insufficient; you need to be adversely affected. |
| Rule: | APA § 10 says that plaintiffs are entitled to judicial review if they are "adversely affected" by an agency action. (Administrative Procedure Act: 5 U.S.C. § 701) |
| Reasoning: | If merely having an interest in the problem were sufficient, we'd have lawsuits galore. Aesthetic and environmental well-being are permissible interests/sources of injury, but we require "injury in fact," meaning that the party seeking review must actually be among the injured. |
| Dicta: | Douglas, dissenting: let's get rid of the doctrine of standing, and just let anyone who wants to put together a lawsuit do so. |