employ a chaplain for the purpose of "invoking] Divine guidance" on its proceedings, see 463 U.S. at 792, then, a fortiori. Congress may limit the chaplain position to persons who (by virtue of their beliefs) are willing and able to perform that task. See also id. at 793 ("[w]e cannot... perceive any suggestion that choosing a clergyman of one denomination advances the beliefs of a particular church"). Put another way, plaintiffs allegations, even if true, allege no invasion of a legally protected interest. See Clavbrook v. Slater. Ill F.3d904, 906-07 (D.C. Cir. 1997) ('"appellants lack standing because the injury they assert is to a nonexistent right'") (parenthetical) (quoting Ariav Assocs.. Inc. v. Bush. 891 F.2d 894, 898 (Fed. Cir. 1989).
Plaintiff also cannot satisfy the causation requirement. The House and Senate chaplains are officers chosen by the Members of the respective Houses, see U.S. Const., Art. I, § 2 cl. 5 (House); id at § 3, cl. 5 (Senate), and none of the defendants has a vote (or otherwise participates) in that selection process. Accordingly, plaintiffs alleged "injury" is not "fairly ... trace[able] to the challenged action of the defendant[s]'." Luian. 504 U.S. at 560 (emphasis added) (internal quotations and citations omitted); see also Kurtz. 829 F.2d at 1142 (finding lack of standing to challenge guest speaker program based on similar analysis).10
Finally, and for similar reasons, plaintiff cannot demonstrate that his "injury" is likely to be redressed by a favorable decision. "Relief that does not remedy the injury suffered cannot bootstrap a plaintiff into federal court; that is the very essence of the redressability requirement." Steel Co.. 523 U.S. at 107 (1998). Because defendants play no role in the chaplain selection
'°To be sure, plaintiff has named "the Congress of the United States" as a defendant. But that does not change the analysis. Under the Constitution, each House separately chooses its officers. See U.S. Const., Art. I, § 2 cl. 5 (House officers); id. at § 3, cl. 5 (Senate officers). Thus, officer selection is not a matter committed to the Congress qua the Congress.
-9-