Bost v. Illinois Bd. of Elections · ¶79

This contention misunderstands Clapper's standing rule and how it applied in that case. In Clapper, the harm the plaintiffs feared (unlawful surveillance) would occur at the precise moment that FISA was invoked against them or their clients. And because the asserted injury stemmed directly from the application of the challenged regulation, the risk of future harm was tied directly to the risk of FISA's future application to the plaintiffs. It mattered, then, that the possibility of FISA's application was only speculative.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.