not remedy his injury and would do nothing to redress his feelings of being an "outsider."  "[P]sychic satisfaction is not an acceptable Article III remedy because it does not redress a cognizable Article III injury....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 Company, 523 U.S. at 107.  Accordingly, since Newdow cannot meet the redressability requirement, summary judgment should be granted on his claims.
3.   Newdow Lacks Standing As A Taxpayer Because He Failed to Identify Any Specific Expenditure Of Tax Dollars For The Prayer.
It is equally well-established that Mewdow does not have standing as a taxpayer unless he can identify tax dollars spent solely on the challenged conduct.  Doremus v. Board of .Education of Borough of Hawthorne, 342 U.S. 429 (1952)(taxpayer lacks standing unless he can show that Bible reading increased any tax he paid; allegation that school spent tax funds on teacher salaries, equipment, building maintenance, etc., insufficient to confer standing).
Newdow attempts to establish standing as a taxpayer by alleging "on information and belief, federal tax dollars were spent--under the taxing and spending power of Article I, 8, of the constitution-to hold the ceremony, to assist Rev. Graham, and to broadcast the Defendant's religious message."  Complaint, IT 25.   These allegations fail to identify any funds used solely for the prayer.
In fact, no federal tax funds were used to pay Reverend Graham for his appearance or for his expenses.  Graham
12