united-states standing
Is &quot;standing&quot; required in a &quot;private prosecution&quot;, and if so, who has it?
<p>I have been reading a little bit about "private prosecutions." One question in my mind is, if they were legal, who would have standing to prosecute them?  Would standing even be required?  </p>

<p>For example, one of the laws I would like to privately prosecute are the laws of "official oppression", which the AG never seems to want to prosecute.</p>

<p>In another case, who would have standing (if private prosecution were legal/accepted) to privately prosecute Hillary Clinton for her emails? After all, Hillary Clinton hasn't personally harmed me in any <em>particular</em> way; would this preclude my standing to prosecute Hillary Clinton?</p>

<p>What about a murder case, where the victim was dead? Who could privately prosecute then? Is standing required for these cases?</p>

<p>In the US, private prosecutions are <em>heavily</em> disfavored, and are not allowed in most jurisdictions. Where they are allowed, they tend to be limited in nature and subject to the ultimate control of a government officer.</p>

<p>Federal court is one of the places where private prosecutions are not allowed. However, in two cases, Congress has decided that private citizens can file a <em>civil</em> case on behalf of the United States. These are called <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/a/560/37"><em>qui tam</em> actions</a>, and the private citizen is representing the interest of the United States; the United States has standing, so the private citizen does as well. Private criminal prosecution would presumably follow the same rule if it existed and was constitutional at the federal level.</p>

<p>Expanding on cpast's answer, the right of private prosecution has been denied by SCOTUS. <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/614/case.html" rel="nofollow">Linda R. S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614</a> held that "a private citizen lacks a judicially cognizable interest in the prosecution or nonprosecution of another", and this is affirmed in <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/454/83/case.html" rel="nofollow">Leeke v. Timmerman, 454 U.S. 83</a>, which held that</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>The decision to prosecute is solely within the prosecutor's
  discretion. Thus, a private citizen has no judicially cognizable right
  to prevent state officials from presenting information, through
  intervention of the state solicitor, that will assist a magistrate in
  determining whether to issue an arrest warrant.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Anyone can take a private prosecution - they are legal and don't require standing.  (At least I know that to be a fact - albeit not one normally made obvious to people - in New Zealand - I am pretty sure it would be a case in most countries based on UK law)</p>

<p>You may, however, have an uphill battle with getting evidence - and the costs associated with doing this.</p>
