In my suit against terahertz imaging by the NYPD, their motion to dismiss based primarily on standing is now fully briefed. In it’s final say on the matter, the NYPD argued the following:

Plaintiff Will Have Standing If, And When, The NYPD Implements The Scanners And Plaintiff Is Among The Scanned

In other words, the NYPD argues that the courts may not prevent the NYPD from violating the people — they must wait until they have already violated the people. Luckily for the people, that’s actually not the legal standard. In addition to stepping in once an actual injury has occurred, the courts may step in when an injury is “imminent.” Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560, 561 (1992). Additionally, threatened injury is sometimes enough to cause actual injury (for example, a threat to the right to speak freely is often enough to convince a court that people are not speaking because of the threat, and therefore an actual injury exists). The court may or may not decide that my injury is imminent enough (and if he decides against, I can re-open the case as soon as the scanners hit the streets), but it certainly won’t be based upon the NYPD’s deranged interpretation of the cases and controversies clause.

Corbett v. City of New York II – Motion to Dismiss (.pdf)
Corbett v. City of New York II – Motion to Dismiss Opposition (.pdf)
Corbett v. City of New York II – Motion to Dismiss Reply (.pdf)