Принцип самостоятельности бюджетов в механизме защиты имущественных интересов публично-правовых образований. Татьяна Братко

S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: http://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/court-of-appeals-published/2005/20050804-c230858-135-142o-230858o-opn-coa.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Adair v. State of Michigan, 470 Mich. 105, 680 N. W. 2d 386 (2004) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL:http://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/supreme-court/2004/20040609-s121536-93-adair5oct03-op.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Adair v. State of Michigan, 250 Mich. App. 691, 651 N. W. 2d 393 (2002) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: http://law.justia.com/cases/ michigan/court-of-appeals-published/2002/20020423-c230858-74-97o-230858-opn-coa.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Durant v. State of Michigan, 456 Mich. 175, 566 N. W. 2d 272 (1997) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: http://law.justia.com/cases/michigan/supreme-court/1997/104458-8.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      214

      См.: Adair v. State of Michigan, 302 Mich. App. 305, 839 N. W. 2d 681 (2013) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: http:// law.justia.com/cases/michigan/court-of-appeals-published/2013/302142.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      215

      Подробнее о развитии практики ВС США по делам, в которых налогоплательщики оспаривают легитимность бюджетных расходов и налогов, см.: Bednar P After Warren [Electronic resource]: Revisiting Taxpayer Standing and the Constitutionality of Parsonage Allowances // Minnesota Law Review. 2003. Vol. 87, Issue 6. P 2107–2131. URL: http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/issue/87-6/ (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Trueworthy J. A. Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, Inc. [Electronic resource]: The Remnants of Taxpayer Standing in the Era of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives // Rutgers Law Review. 2008. Vol. 60, Issue 4. P 1073–1102. URL: http://www. rutgerslawreview.com/2011/volume-60-summer-2008-issue-4/ (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Zelinsky E. A. Putting State Courts in the Constitutional Driver’s Seat [Electronic resource]: State Taxpayer Standing After Cuno and Winn // Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly. 2012. Vol. 40, Issue 1. P 4-35. URL: http:// www.hastingsconlawquarterly.org/archives/V40/Zelinsky_Final_Online.pdf (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      216

      См., в частности: Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon, 262 U. S. 447 (1923) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/262/447/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      217

      См., например: Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, 454 U. S. 464 (1982) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/ federal/us/454/464/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Hein v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, 551 U. S. 587 (2007) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/ us/551/587/ (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      218

      См.: Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn, 563 U. S._

      (2011) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/563/09-987/ (дата обращения:

      25.01.2017); Allen v. Wright, 468 U. S. 737 (1984) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/ us/468/737/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization, 426 U. S. 26 (1976) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/ us/426/26/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Warth v. Seldin, 422 U. S. 490 (1975) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/422/490/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      219

      См.: Mueller v. Allen, 463 U. S. 388 (1983) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/ federal/us/463/388/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Committee for Public Education & Religious Liberty v. Nyquist, 413 U. S. 756 (1973) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme. justia.com/cases/federal/us/413/756/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      220

      См.: Walz v. Tax Comm'n of City of New York, 397 U. S. 664 (1970) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme. justia.com/cases/federal/us/397/664/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      221

      См., в частности: Federal Election Commission v. Akins, 524 U. S. 11 (1998) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https:// supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/524/11/case.html (дата обращения:

      25.01.2017).

      222

      См.: Flast v. Cohen, 392 U. S. 83 (1968) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/ us/392/83/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      223

      См., например, следующие дела, в которых ВС США высказал мнение о возможности налогоплательщика оспорить легитимность федеральных бюджетных расходов: Tilton v. Richardson, 403 U. S. 672 (1971) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/ cases/federal/us/403/672/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U. S. 589 (1988) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/487/589/ case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      224

      См., в частности: Brilmayer L. The Jurisprudence of Article III [Electronic resource]: Perspectives on the «Case Or Controversy» Requirement // Harvard Law Review. 1979. Vol. 93, Issue 2. P 297–321. URL: http://www.jstor.org/ stable/1340380 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Scalia A. The Doctrine of Standing as an Essential Element of the Separation of Powers [Electronic resource] // Suffolk University Law Review. 1983. Vol. 17, Issue 4. P 881–900. URL: http:// suffolklawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Scalia_17SuffolkULRev881. pdf (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Roberts J. G. Article III Limits on Statutory Standing [Electronic resource] // Duke Law Journal. 1993. Vol. 42, Issue 6. P. 1219–1232. URL: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol42/iss6/4 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Kontorovich E. What Standing Is Good for [Electronic resource] // Virginia Law Review. 2007. Vol. 93, Issue 7. P 1663–1727. URL: http://www.jstor.org/ stable/25050393 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      225

      Подробнее об этом см.: Abramowitz A. A Remedy for Every Right [Electronic resource]: What Federal Courts Can Learn from California’s Taxpayer Standing // California Law