Standing to Challenge Agency Actions.
Justice Sandra Day O"Connor's requirement for standing to challenge agency action in Allen V. Wright:.
In Allen v. Wright (1984), the respondents were African-American parents of children who were attending public schools in seven states in school districts that were undergoing desegregation. The respondents alleged that the IRS did not adopt sufficient standards and procedures to fulfill its obligation to deny tax-exempt status to racially discriminatory private schools. .
As a result of the IRS's inaction, the plaintiffs alleged that they were harmed directly and their children's opportunity to obtain an education in desegregated public schools were interfered with. Therefore, the respondents brought a nationwide class action suit on behalf of themselves, their children, and other parents of black children attending public school systems undergoing or which may in the future undergo desegregation pursuant to court order. .
The respondents requested three things: (1) declaratory judgment that the IRS tax-exemption practices are unlawful, (2) an injunction requiring the IRS to deny tax exemptions to a broader class of private schools than the class of racially discriminatory private schools, and (3) an order directing the IRS to replace its 1975 guidelines with standards consistent with the requested injunction. .
The district court ruled that the respondents lacked standing and dismissed the case. The appeals court reversed ruling that the respondents had standing to maintain the lawsuit. The Government defendants and defendant-intervenor .
Allen filed separate petitions to the Supreme Court to review the appeals court's holding that the respondents had standing to bring the lawsuit. Justice O"Connor wrote the majority opinion. The Court ruled that the respondents did not have standing. .
Justice O"Connor stated that the core component for the standing requirement derives directly from the Constitution.