Does a plaintiff have standing when they allege personal, concrete injuries stemming from government policies, even when such policies cause widely shared harms to the public?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does a plaintiff have standing when they allege personal, concrete injuries stemming from government policies, even when such policies cause widely shared harms to the public? : ; 2. Does the political question doctrine preclude judicial review when a plaintiff challenges an executive policy as inconsistent with statutory mandates rather than as a discretionary matter of policy? 3. Can nominal damages, as outlined in Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, suffice to establish standing when a plaintiff alleges a constitutional or statutory injury with primarily psychological and emotional consequences? 4. Are indigent, pro se litigants entitled to a reasoned explanation in appeal dismissals to ensure equal access to justice, even when the court determines a case lacks arguable merit? 3 ;