2.   Newdow Fails To Meet The Third Test For Standing
Because He Cannot Show His Injury Can Be Redressed In This Action.
To meet the third requirement of standing--redressability--a plaintiff must show that he "personally would benefit in a tangible way from the court's intervention." Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. at 508.
At this stage in the litigation, Newdow would not benefit from an order finding that a prayer containing Christian references violates the Establishment Clause.  A fair reading of his prayer for relief shows he seeks a declaration that President Bush violated the Establishment Clause when he used "any clergyman" at the inauguration, and seeks an injunction directed against President Bush from "repeating this or engaging in any similar religious acts."  Prayer for Relief, p. 7 of the Complaint.3  He does not seek injunctive or declaratory relief against just Christian prayer, but seeks a ban on all prayer. His "injury" stems from his atheism and his allegations that prayers to God make him, an atheist, feel like an outsider.  Complaint, Hlf 14, 30. Newdow is only interested in an order finding that all inaugural prayer violates the Establishment Clause, but this court has already ruled against him on that point, and denied him the relief he requested.
Any further order from this court that Christian prayer, or a non-denominational prayer referring only to God generally will
3  Any such injunction would undoubtedly be unconstitutionally vague.  To what conduct would such an injunction be addressed?  To saying "God Bless America" in his State of the Union Address?  Utilizing government-paid Secret Service agents to accompany him to church services on Sunday morning?
11