Boyce F. Martin, Jr.,
Thomas More Law Center v. Obama…
(2011)
“ Magaw, 132 F.3d 272, 279 (6th Cir. 1997) . “We review issues of justiciability pursuant to Article III de novo.” Id. at 278. Standing requires plaintiffs to demonstrate “actual present harm or a significant possibility of future harm.” Id. at 279. “ [T] he presence of one party with standing is sufficient to satisfy Article III's case-or-controversy requirement.” Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic & Institutional Rights, Inc., 547 U.S. 47, 52 n.2 (2006) . An issue must be ripe, or ready for review, before we act. “Ripeness requires that the injury in fact be certainly impending.” ”
