If a court of appeals finds a State litigant failed to demonstrate injury-in-fact that is traceable to the challenged action and redressable by the court, must it separately consider whether the State litigant has standing under Massachusetts to challenge orders by a federal agency that implicate the State's quasi-sovereign and parens patriae interests?

2. If a federal statute affords a State litigant procedural rights to challenge agency actions that affect the State's quasi-sovereign and parens patriae interests, do Massachusetts and Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 572 n.7 (1992) require the State to demonstrate injury-in-fact that is traceable to the challenged action and redressable by the court in order to establish Article III standing?

Whether a state litigant has standing to challenge FERC orders under Massachusetts v. EPA when a federal statute provides the state procedural rights to challenge the orders