Latest News

The US Supreme Court has declined to hear a novel climate change case brought by youth

The US Supreme Court has declined to hear a novel climate change case brought by youth

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected on Monday a bid from 21 young people who wanted to bring back a novel suit claiming that the U.S. Government's energy policy violates their right to be protected against climate change.

The justices refused to hear the appeal by the youth activists of a ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court in San Francisco. Circuit Court of Appeals directed a federal judge to dismiss the case in Oregon after finding that they lacked standing to sue.

The verdict marks the end to Juliana v. United States. It was one of the most long-running climate cases youth activists filed in the United States and the lawyers for the plaintiffs say that it helped spark a larger youth-led climate rights movement.

In a press release, Julia Olson, an attorney for Our Children's Trust and a plaintiff in the case, stated that the Supreme Court's ruling today was not the end. The impact of Juliana could not be determined by the outcome of this particular case.

The Department of Justice didn't immediately respond to an inquiry for comment.

The legal group, along with its clients from the youth sector, have filed a number of lawsuits accusing both state and federal governments for exacerbating global warming by adopting policies which encourage or permit the burning and extraction of fossil fuels against their rights.

Montana Supreme Court ruled in December that, despite some failed cases, the constitution of the state guarantees a right for a stable climate. Hawaii reached a landmark agreement with youth in June to decarbonize the state's transportation system by 2045.

In the case filed on Monday, the youth plaintiffs alleged that the U.S. Government has allowed, authorized, and subsidized the extraction and consumption of fossil fuels despite knowing these actions cause catastrophic climate change.

The plaintiffs claim that U.S. policies on energy contribute to climate change and violate their constitutional rights to equal protection, due process, and equal treatment.

In a ruling from 2020, the 9th Circuit ruled that it was outside the jurisdiction of the courts for them to order or supervise remedies to combat climate change. Such complex policy decisions would be better left up to Congress and executive branch.

The court returned the case to the Oregon judge, instructing him to dismiss the lawsuit. U.S. district judge Ann Aiken allowed the plaintiffs, citing changes in the law, to amend their complaint and keep it moving.

A panel of three judges from the 9th Circuit in May 2024 ruled that the ruling made in 2020 did not allow for any amendments to the complaint, and ordered Aiken dismiss the case. (Reporting and editing by Alexia Garamfalvi, Richard Chang, and Nate Raymond from Boston)

(source: Reuters)