Montana loses fight against youth climate activists in landmark ruling [Ars Technica]

arstechnica.com Montana loses fight against youth climate activists in landmark ruling

Emotional testimony leads to plaintiffs' win in first youth-led climate trial.

14 comments

Good on them, hope more cases follow this precedent. We all inhabit the same planet and should have a vested interest in keeping it liveable.

Youth plaintiffs did not ask for any damages beyond their attorneys' fees and costs, which were awarded by the court. To young people suing, winning is seemingly just about pushing the state to embrace climate science and mitigate known harms moving forward.

Mad respect. People over profits.

60
- This is fantastic, thank you posting this. ❤️‍🔥 (Both OP and this quote.)
  
  3
Scotus to overturn in 3..2..1

20
- It's about a state constitutional right, where they don't have jurisdiction.
  
  Many details about the case itself are here
  
  19
  
  Oh good because I can see Clarence writing a majority opinion about how this would affect his ability to accept free rides on an empty 747.
  
  13
- It might be overturned by the Supreme Court of Montana, but as a state ruling its totally outside the federal legal system.
  
  It's worth noting this underappreciated feature in an overall very flawed system. A similar example: no matter what happens no president can pardon Trump for racketeering charges he faces in Georgia.
  
  10
  
  I’m learning so much about the law through this process. And who said Trump didn’t help educate America? :)
  
  3
- came here to say the same thing and ask others to postulate what their plan is; but then i remembered that this isn't the first time the young tried to push for something and did nothing.
  
  1
  
  The impact is narrow: it forces the state of Montana to review climate impact as part of environmental review of new projects (eg: opening a new coal mine):
  
  The state’s characterization of the court proceeding as a “MEPA trial” and not a climate trial ignored the fact that the MEPA provision at issue was squarely about climate change. By prohibiting the consideration of greenhouse gas emissions and climate change in environmental reviews, Seeley ruled that provision is at odds with Montana’s constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment. At issue here is not how MEPA works, but how the state’s dismissive treatment of climate change endangers the youth plaintiffs and degrades Montana’s environment.
  
  That's kind of a bare minimum start. It'll take a whole lot more to get to where we need to be.
  
  3
I’m intoxicated and follow some NFL communities so I thought this was about Joe Montana for a second.

9

You've viewed 14 comments.