To ensure that only parties with a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of a case can bring a lawsuit.

To prevent courts from becoming overburdened with frivolous or speculative lawsuits.

To protect the government from legal challenges that could interfere with its ability to carry out its functions.

To promote judicial efficiency and prevent unnecessary litigation.

Injury-in-fact

Zone of interests

Causation

Redressability

The plaintiff must have suffered a concrete and particularized injury that is fairly traceable to the defendant's conduct.

The plaintiff must have a legally protected interest that has been invaded by the defendant's conduct.

The plaintiff must be able to show that the defendant's conduct has caused them economic harm.

The plaintiff must be able to show that the defendant's conduct has violated their constitutional rights.

The plaintiff's interest must be within the scope of the statute or regulation that the defendant is alleged to have violated.

The plaintiff's interest must be one that the statute or regulation was intended to protect.

The plaintiff's interest must be one that is recognized by the courts as a legitimate interest.

All of the above.

The plaintiff must be able to show that a favorable decision in the lawsuit will redress their injury.

The plaintiff must be able to show that the defendant is likely to comply with a court order.

The plaintiff must be able to show that the lawsuit will not impose an undue burden on the courts.

All of the above.

A company that is denied a permit to operate a new factory by a local zoning board.

A citizen who is denied a building permit by a city government.

A group of environmental activists who are challenging the government's approval of a new oil pipeline.

All of the above.

A person who is not directly affected by the administrative action.

A person who has not suffered any injury as a result of the administrative action.

A person whose interest is not within the zone of interests that the relevant statute or regulation was intended to protect.

All of the above.

Procedural standing refers to the plaintiff's right to bring a lawsuit, while substantive standing refers to the plaintiff's right to obtain a favorable decision on the merits of the case.

Procedural standing refers to the plaintiff's ability to show that they have suffered a concrete and particularized injury, while substantive standing refers to the plaintiff's ability to show that the defendant's conduct violated the law.

Procedural standing refers to the plaintiff's ability to show that they have a legally protected interest that has been invaded by the defendant's conduct, while substantive standing refers to the plaintiff's ability to show that the defendant's conduct caused them harm.

None of the above.

A case is moot when the plaintiff's injury has been redressed before the lawsuit is decided.

A case is moot when the plaintiff's injury is no longer capable of being redressed.

A case is moot when the plaintiff's interest in the lawsuit is no longer substantial.

All of the above.

A case is ripe when the plaintiff's injury is sufficiently concrete and particularized.

A case is ripe when the plaintiff's injury is fairly traceable to the defendant's conduct.

A case is ripe when the plaintiff's interest in the lawsuit is within the zone of interests that the relevant statute or regulation was intended to protect.

All of the above.

A facial challenge attacks the constitutionality of a statute or regulation on its face, while an as-applied challenge attacks the constitutionality of a statute or regulation as applied to the plaintiff's specific circumstances.

A facial challenge is always successful, while an as-applied challenge is always unsuccessful.

A facial challenge can only be brought by a plaintiff who has suffered an injury, while an as-applied challenge can be brought by a plaintiff who has not suffered an injury.

None of the above.

Third-party standing allows a person to bring a lawsuit on behalf of another person who has suffered an injury.

Third-party standing is only allowed in cases where the plaintiff has a close relationship with the person who has suffered an injury.

Third-party standing is only allowed in cases where the plaintiff has a financial interest in the outcome of the lawsuit.

None of the above.

Organizational standing allows an organization to bring a lawsuit on behalf of its members.

Organizational standing is only allowed in cases where the organization has a large number of members.

Organizational standing is only allowed in cases where the organization has a financial interest in the outcome of the lawsuit.

None of the above.

A motion to dismiss for lack of standing is filed before discovery, while a motion for summary judgment is filed after discovery.

A motion to dismiss for lack of standing challenges the plaintiff's right to bring the lawsuit, while a motion for summary judgment challenges the merits of the plaintiff's case.

A motion to dismiss for lack of standing can only be granted if the plaintiff has not suffered an injury, while a motion for summary judgment can be granted even if the plaintiff has suffered an injury.

All of the above.