that “a State has a quasi-sovereign interest in the health and well-being — both physical and economic — of its residents in general.” Snapp, 458 U.S. at 607, 102 S.Ct. 3260. The Court suggested in Snapp that “[o]ne helpful indication in determining whether an alleged injury to the health and welfare of its citizens suffices to give the State standing to sue as parens patriae is whether the injury is one that the State, if it could, would likely attempt to address through its sovereign lawmaking powers.” Id. For example, where a State legislature enacts a statute that seeks to “seeur[e] an honest marketplace” for State residents, then the statute expresses a quasi-sovereign interest and grants the State standing to bring a parens patriae suit. SDS West Corp., 640 F.Supp.2d at 1050 (<HOLDING>). A State that brings a suit in which it
holding that securing an honest marketplace is a well established quasisovereign interest holding that a state must articulate a quasisovereign interest in order to have parens patriae standing holding that a state has a quasisovereign interest in the economic wellbeing of its citizens and in not being denied its rightful status within the federal system recognizing as a quasisovereign interest that the state and its residents are not excluded from the benefits that are to flow fiom participation in the federal system holding that when a state sues on behalf of its residents without a sovereign or quasisovereign interest it is only a nominal party and thus not the real party in interest