× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
w
5
a
3
j
2
a
2
t
2
u
2
r
2
j
2
j
2
l
2
d
2
y
2
Home Q & A Board Other Fields Homework Help Business
New Topic  
Ptelwa Ptelwa
wrote...
Go to Answer
Posts: 560
Rep: 0 0
6 years ago
In Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, where foreign aid decisions of the U.S. government were challenged as a violation of the Endangered Species Act, because the Nile crocodile in Egypt could be harmed, the Supreme Court held:
 a. the plaintiffs had no standing to bring the case because there was no injury in fact
  b. the plaintiffs had standing because they had visited the area where the crocodiles lived
  c. the animals at issue were not endangered and so were not the proper subject of a lawsuit
  d. although the plaintiffs had standing to sue, the issue of saving crocodiles was beyond the court's expertise e. the Endangered Species Act was the wrong statute under which to bring this claim
Read 42 times
1 Reply
Replies
Answer verified by a subject expert
gool34gool34
wrote...
#1
Top Poster
Posts: 1186
Rep: 3 0
6 years ago
Sign in or Sign up in seconds to unlock everything for free
1

Related Topics

Ptelwa Author
wrote...

6 years ago
I appreciate what you did here, answered it right Smiling Face with Open Mouth
Kstan109
wrote...

Yesterday
Correct Slight Smile TY
ouasfoudgewu
wrote...

2 hours ago
This calls for a celebration Person Raising Both Hands in Celebration
New Topic      
Quick Reply
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  1315 People Browsing
Start New Topic Take the Tour CoursesNew Study Tools Topics Trending Browse by Textbook
Live Chat
Related Images
  
 735
  
 196
  
 110
Your Opinion
What percentage of nature vs. nurture dictates human intelligence?
Votes: 436
Previous poll results: Who will win the 2024 president election?