This is the first-ever trial of its kind in the United States. About 15 young people in Montana accuse their state of violating their constitutional right to a “clean and healthy environment”. A phenomenon that is growing all over the world: young people are turning to the courts to challenge the climate inaction of their governments.
What’s this Montana thing? They have nothing to do, the young people over there?
This is very serious business. It is a real trial which opened on June 12 and which will continue until June 23 next. Sixteen young people are accusing Montana of violating the state Constitution, which guarantees them the right to a clean and healthy environment. Held v. Montana is the first climate trial in US history. The 16 young people aged 5 to 22 want to demonstrate in particular that Montana’s support for the fossil fuel industry is detrimental to their quality of life and their future.
It makes great headlines for the media, but it doesn’t seem very serious, this story. Today’s young people, real cloud shovelers…
The Supreme Court of Montana obviously disagrees. She gave the green light, on June 6, to the holding of such a trial, despite several attempts by the authorities to have the prosecution canceled. According to Merlin Voghel, lawyer at the Center québécois du droit de l’environnement (CQDE), the plaintiffs nevertheless raise an important point regarding the validity of a Montana law that prohibits taking into account the impacts on the climate at the time whether or not to grant permits to fossil fuel companies. “This argument is the one most likely to work [au tribunal] “, he believes.
That doesn’t mean they’re going to win their case. And even if justice gave them reason, would that really change anything?
It’s a good question. In the event of victory, the plaintiffs request that a statement be drawn up, affirming that their rights have been violated. They also want to see legislative changes on climate issues in Montana. But if the court agrees with them, it could especially set a precedent while similar cases are underway in other American states. Note that the 16 young people are represented by Our Children’s Trust, a law firm that has filed lawsuits in the 50 states of the United States, but also in several other countries, including Canada.
And then ? Let’s say there are about sixty similar actions. There is nothing to write to his mother…
In fact, there are many more. Since 2015, more than 1,200 such lawsuits have been filed worldwide, according to the most recent report by two researchers from the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change. In their report titled Global Trends in Climate Change Litigation: 2022 SnapshotJoana Setzer and Catherine Higham report that the number of lawsuits increases every year.
And I who was talking about cloud shovelers… Looks like I’m in the dark. Seems like an effective strategy, indeed.
Not all lawsuits are necessarily valid, but in cases where a decision on the merits has been made, more than half of them (54%) have led to increased action against climate change, mentions elsewhere the report of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change.
This is called a great batting average. Enough to make Ty Cobb, one of the best hitters in major league baseball history, jealous. I am impressed.
You are not the only one. Even the IPCC has noticed the growing influence of these actions. “The role of litigation on climate governance outcomes and ambition has been recognized by Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [GIEC] in 2022, in a document approved by the representatives of all the Member States”, point out Joana Setzer and Catherine Higham in their report.
Do you have concrete examples of lawsuits that have produced results?
In April 2021, the German Constitutional Court ruled in favor of a group of young people and forced the government to revise upwards its target for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Important decisions have also been rendered in France and the Netherlands. In Canada, however, the group Environnement Jeunesse failed to win action against the federal government for its lack of climate ambition.
But decisions made in other countries don’t really matter here, do they?
Merlin Voghel, lawyer at the CQDE, believes rather that “the evolution of international jurisprudence always ends up influencing Canadian law”. He also points out that the courts are increasingly sensitive to environmental issues. In addition, recent changes to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act now guarantee the right to a healthy environment. A new legislative provision that opens the door to possible legal remedies in the country, believes Mr.e Vogel.