 |
| Sierra Club v. Morton | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued November 17, 1971 Decided April 19, 1972 | |
| Full case name | Sierra Club v. Rogers Clark Ballard Morton, Secretary of the Interior, et al. |
| Citations | 405 U.S. 727 (more) 92 S. Ct. 1361, 31 L. Ed. 2d 636 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Sierra Club v. Hickel, 433 F.2d 24 (9th Cir. 1970). |
| Subsequent | Sierra Club v. Morton, 348 F. Supp. 219, (N.D. Cal. 1972) |
| Holding | |
| A person has standing to seek judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act only if he can show that he himself has suffered or will suffer injury, whether economic or otherwise. In this case, where petitioner asserted no individualized harm to itself or its members, it lacked standing to maintain the action. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Stewart, joined by Burger, White, Marshall |
| Dissent | Douglas |
| Dissent | Brennan |
| Dissent | Blackmun |
| Powell and Rehnquist took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
| Laws applied | |
| Administrative Procedure Act | |
Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727 (1972), is a Supreme Court of the United States case on the issue of standing under the Administrative Procedure Act. The Court rejected a lawsuit by the Sierra Club seeking to block the development of a ski resort at Mineral King valley in the Sierra Nevada Mountains because the club had not alleged any injury.
The case prompted a famous dissent by Justice William O. Douglas suggesting that in response to ecological concerns, environmental objects (such as a valley, an alpine meadow, a river, or a lake) should be granted legal personhood by the public.