Editing Antonin Scalia (section)

====Litigation and standing====
Following the death of Scalia, Paul Barrett, writing for ''[[Bloomberg Businessweek]]'', reported that: "Translating into liberal argot: Scalia changed the rules for who could sue". The issue elevated the recognition of Scalia as a notable influence on establishing and determining the conditions under which cases could be brought to trial and for litigation—and by whom such litigation could take place.<ref>{{Cite news |date=February 16, 2016 |title=How Scalia Kept the Little Guys Out of Court |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-16/how-scalia-kept-the-little-guys-out-of-court |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202035748/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-16/how-scalia-kept-the-little-guys-out-of-court |archive-date=February 2, 2017 |access-date=January 30, 2017 |work=Bloomberg.com |via=www.bloomberg.com}}</ref> David Rivkin, from the conservative standpoint, said, "He (Scalia) did more to clarify and limit the bounds and scope of judicial power than any Supreme Court Justice in history, particularly in the area of standing and class actions". Scalia indicated his long-held position from the time of his 1983 law review article titled "The Doctrine of Standing as an Essential Element of the Separation of Powers". As summarized by Barrett, "He (Scalia) wrote that courts had misappropriated authority from other branches of government by allowing too many people to sue corporations and government agencies, especially in environmental cases". In a practical sense, Scalia brought to the attention of the Court the authority to restrict "standing" in class action suits in which the litigants may be defined in descriptive terms rather than as well-defined and unambiguous litigants.<ref>Paul Barrett, "Justice for the Big Guys," ''Bloomberg News Weekly'', February 15, 2016, p. 13.</ref>