Do I understand correctly that this ruling doesn’t really deal with whether faith-based initiatives by the Fed are constitutional, that it only says Citizen John Q. Smith is the proper source of such a lawsuit?
If John Q. Smith isn’t a legit source, who/what is?
Pretty much.
Establishment clause lawsuits are just about the only kind of lawsuit where citizens have standing as taxpayers.
If John Q. Smith isn’t a legit source, who/what is?
You're assuming the law is supposed to make sense. Half the time, the law is just a trade-off of special interests based on who is in power at the time.
/cynicism as jude24 hates bar exam preparation.