It’s a landmark decision in the first major climate trial of its kind in the United States: A Montana judge on Monday (August 14) handed down a verdict vindicating 16 youths who accused their state of violating their constitutional right to a “clean environment.” and healthy”. The judge declared unconstitutional a Montana law prohibiting the local administration from taking into account the consequences of greenhouse gas emissions on the climate when awarding permits to fossil fuel companies.
This clause of the law is canceled, decided the judge Kathy Seeley. “Plaintiffs have a fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthy environment, which includes the climate,” she wrote in her more than 100-page decision. “By prohibiting the analysis of greenhouse gas emissions and their impact on the climate”, the clause of this law “is unconstitutional”, she judged.
One of the peculiarities of this lawsuit is that the sixteen plaintiffs, who did not seek financial compensation, are between the ages of 5 and 22. They argue that as children and young adults, the dangerous consequences of fossil fuels and the climate crisis are particularly harmful to them.
“For the first time in U.S. history, a court has found on the merits that a government has violated children’s constitutional rights through laws and actions promoting fossil fuels and ignoring climate change,” reacted in a press release Julia Olson, executive director of Our Children’s Trust, one of the three associations supporting the complainants.
The state of Montana (northwestern United States) has announced that it will appeal. This verdict is “absurd,” said a spokeswoman for the Montana attorney general. “The people of Montana cannot be blamed for changing the climate – even witnesses called by the plaintiffs agree that our state has no impact on the global climate. »
Montana has a population of just over one million, but fossil fuels mined, consumed, transported and processed through and within the state generate approximately 166 million tons of CO2 per year, which is as much as carbon emissions. Argentina, according to the verdict Monday.
The trial was held in mid-June in Helena, capital of Montana. The plaintiffs then recounted how their health, well-being, or family finances were affected.
Lead plaintiff Rikki Held, 22, whose family owns a ranch in eastern Montana, cited a wildfire that knocked out power lines and knocked out power to their ranch for a month, causing the death of cattle because it was no longer possible to pump water. “Rikki feels stress and despair” and suffers “economic damage” from climate change, the verdit says. “Each additional ton of greenhouse gases emitted exacerbates the damage suffered by plaintiffs,” he adds.
This is the first time that the constitution of an American state has been invoked in court to attack local authorities on a climate issue. The decision could have significant consequences on future cases. Numerous similar lawsuits have been filed across the country – although many have been dismissed.
Plaintiffs in Montana had an advantage: a section of the local constitution clearly states that “the state and everyone shall maintain and improve a clean and wholesome environment in Montana for present and future generations.” “We have proven that Generation Z is a powerful force in the fight against climate change,” Varshini Prakash, executive director of the Sunrise Movement, which brings together young people committed to the cause, said in a statement.
“Thank you to these brave young people who today won a huge victory against climate change,” US Senator Bernie Sanders, 81, said on social media. “It is time for the federal government to follow their lead and hold the fossil fuel industry to account for its role in the climate crisis. »
