Landmark Legal Victory: Montana Judge Rules in Favor of Young Activists, Declares Constitutional Right to Clean Environment
Montana judge rules in favor of young environmental activists in landmark climate change case, stating that state agencies violated their constitutional right to a clean environment by allowing fossil fuel development. The ruling sets a legal precedent and establishes a government duty to protect citizens from climate change. Montana is expected to challenge the decision, but the ruling is likely to impact similar climate change lawsuits across the US. Climate litigation is on the rise globally, holding accountable those responsible for climate harm and pressuring governments and corporations to pursue ambitious climate goals.
In a groundbreaking legal victory for young environmental activists, a Montana judge ruled that state agencies were violating their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment by allowing fossil fuel development.
The case, brought by plaintiffs ranging in age from 5 to 22, marks the first of its kind to go to trial in the US. The ruling establishes a government duty to protect citizens from climate change and sets an important legal precedent.
District court judge Kathy Seeley found the policy the Montana state uses to evaluate fossil fuel permits, which does not consider greenhouse gas emissions, to be unconstitutional. It is the first time a US court has ruled against a government for violating a constitutional right based on climate change.
The judge rejected the state's argument that Montana's emissions are insignificant, stating that they are a substantial factor in climate change. Montana is a major producer of coal and has large oil and gas reserves. The case centered around a provision of the Montana Environmental Policy Act that prevents officials from evaluating greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts when approving new energy projects.
The young plaintiffs argued that this law enables the government to support fossil fuel extraction and burning, which harms their health and well-being and violates their constitutional right to a clean environment. Montana has a history of mining oil, gas, and coal, and the state has experienced a spike in temperatures since 1950, according to a Montana Climate Assessment report.
The plaintiffs, represented by non-profit law firm Our Children's Trust, sued the state in 2020 when they were as young as 2 years old. The trial, the first constitutional climate trial in US history, began in June 2023 and included testimonies from climate experts and petitioners
LlllThe ruling requires Montana to consider climate change before approving new energy projects, but the state is expected to challenge the decision and send the case to the Montana Supreme Court.
Despite the ultimate outcome, this ruling is likely to have a ripple effect across America, potentially influencing similar climate change lawsuits in other states with constitutional guarantees of a clean environment. Climate litigation has been on the rise worldwide, with an increasing number of people suing governments, fossil fuel companies, and greenhouse gas emitters for climate harm.
As of December 2022, there have been 2,180 climate-related cases filed globally, a significant increase from previous years. These cases cover a range of issues, including human rights violations, non-enforcement of climate-related laws, keeping fossil fuels in the ground, climate disclosures, corporate liability, and adaptation failures.
Climate litigation not only holds accountable those responsible for climate harm but also provides greater protections for vulnerable groups and pressures governments and corporations to pursue more ambitious climate change mitigation and adaptation goals. With the urgency of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it is anticipated that more people will turn to the courts to address the climate crisis.
