While environmental groups challenging federal administrative actions have overcome judicial obstacles to standing in most of the federal circuit courts of appeal, the Ninth Circuit stands fast. Not only to contradictions and ambiguities exist between the Ninth Circuit and other circuit courts, but they exist among district courts within the Ninth Circuit itself as well. There the situation is likely to remain in limbo until the Supreme Court, which has granted certiorari in Sierra Club v. Hickel, supra, chooses to resolve the standing issue with finality. See Sierra Club v. Hickel: Standing and the Supreme Court, 1 ELR 10002. See also 1 ELR 10017. Precedent suggests that the issue will ultimately be resolved in favor of the environmental groups, though the Court may also opt for the more restrictive view or, in Sierra Club v. Hickel (now Morton), dodge the tough standing questions altogether.

Two recent Ninth Circuit district court decisions illustrate the confusion. On February 16, 1971, the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon granted defendant's motion to dismiss in Citizens Committee for the Columbia River v. Resor, 1 ELR 20206. See also 1 ELR Dig.[15]. Plaintiffs, the court held, failed to establish standing under criteria enunciated by the Ninth Circuit in Sierra Club v. Hickel, supra, and Alameda Conservation Association v. California, 1 ELR 20097. Plaintiffs thereafter sought to amend their complaint to include the names of individuals who could properly allege injury-in-fact consistent with the Alameda holding. But on March 15, Judge Solomon ruled that because the existing plaintiffs had no standing, there was no one present in court who could be granted leave to amend.