Abstract
The citizen suit is a mechanism that allows private persons to enforce statutes through litigations when the violation of statutes occurs. The characteristics of the private persons allowed to be the law enforcers demand a comprehensive understanding of the relevant statues and court opinions. Because the previous studies in this area in Taiwan focus primarily on the analysis of the statues and largely overlook the role of the judiciary on shaping standing, the purpose of this article is to elucidate the complete accounts of citizen suit standing in both the United States and Taiwan and provide a comparative analysis. This article argues that while putting more weight on the public interest group is a sound policy, expanding the possibility for natural persons to file lawsuits is worthy of substantial attention; therefore, the courts should reconsider its interpretation of ＂aggrieved persons.＂ Specifically, it is suggested that courts could distinguish the concept of ＂aggrieved persons＂ in the citizen suit provisions with the requirement of rights protection in general administrative litigations, recognize broader protected interests as the U.S. courts do, and provide more opportunities for filing citizen suits.