In an opinion yesterday, Judge Nathan rejected a complaint brought by federal employees who are set to be located from 26 Federal Plaza to One World Trade Center. They claim the new lease is illegal, and that the move would harm them because (among other reasons) they fear their new office will be attacked. Judge Nathan found that these fears were insufficient to establish standing:
[T]he fact that the World Trade Center complex was targeted in two very different terrorist attacks over the past twenty-three years, without more, is insufficient to demonstrate a “real and immediate threat,”, that is “certainly impending,” . . . or even a “substantial risk,” that One World Trade Center specifically will be the target of any future, let alone imminent, terrorist attack.
The Court does not doubt that Plaintiffs have genuine fears about the possibility that One World Trade Center could be targeted by a terrorist attack in the future. However, . . . “the reality of the threat … is relevant to the standing inquiry, not the plaintiff[s’] subjective apprehensions” . . . .