1. Who were the petitioners in this case and why did they claim to have standing?

2. What reasons does the Court give for the standing requirement?

In Hollingsworth v. Perry, 570 U.S. ___, 133 S. Ct. 2652 (2013) involving California's Proposition 8, a voter-enacted ballot initiative declaring that marriage is between a man and a woman, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the proponents did not have standing to appeal the district court's order declaring that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional. Article III of the Constitution confines the judicial power of federal courts to deciding actual “cases” or “controversies" and to have standing, a litigant must seek relief for an injury that affects them in a personal and individual way and they must possess a direct stake in the outcome of the case.