So WHO (We the American people?) have standing when it comes to that WE are "hiring" our President, hmmm???
We are voting for a person who can send our sons and daughters off to war and make decisions that effect our national safety and well-being. Every American has standing in this regard. Is it unreasonable to expect that someone seeking the presidency should therefore provide evidence of their ability to satisfy a few simple requirements for such high office? The willingness to look the other way with Obama has reached ridiculous proportions.
There are three requirements for standing: Injury, causation, and redressability.
Injury: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury - an invasion of a legally protected interest which is concrete and particularized. The injury must be actual or imminent, distinct and palpable, not abstract. This injury could be economic as well as non-economic.
Causation: There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of, so that the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and not the result of the independent action of some third party who is not before the court.
Redressability: It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable court decision will redress the injury.