University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review


Mark Wankum

Document Type



This article deals with the often misunderstood and maligned issue of taxpayer standing. It seeks to explore the Court's standing jurisprudence as it has evolved from "cases and controversies" to a modern constitutional doctrine. The article begins with a discussion of the Framers' judiciary and the development of a modern standing doctrine. It then turns to the area of taxpayer and citizen suits, exploring the judicial landmarks and landmines from Frothigham v. Mellon to Flast. Next, applications and limitations of the Flast test during the Burger, Rehnquist, and early Roberts Courts are explored, before turning to the most recent decision of Hein. Commentary concludes with a look into the future of taxpayer suits, a critical analysis of the Hein decision, and a recommendation that the Court reconcile these wayward jurisprudences by abandoning Flast and applying a uniform standing analysis across the board.

Included in

Jurisprudence Commons