In 'monumental moment,' Montana Supreme Court rules for youths claiming right to clean environment
The Montana Supreme Court has struck down a state law banning consideration of greenhouse gas emissions in fossil-fuel-permitting decisions. (Photo illustration by Elmarie Jara/ABA Journal/Shutterstock)
The Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down a state law banning consideration of greenhouse gas emissions in fossil-fuel-permitting decisions, citing a state constitutional provision that guarantees a “clean and healthful environment.”
The Montana Supreme Court sided with 16 youths who alleged environmental harm. The decision is the first of its kind by a state supreme court, according to a press release by Our Children’s Trust, a nonprofit public interest law firm, and the Western Environmental Law Center, which represented the plaintiffs.
The lead counsel for the plaintiffs, Nate Bellinger, called the opinion “a monumental moment for Montana, our youth and the future of our planet” in the press release.
The state constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment” includes a stable climate system, the Montana Supreme Court said in the majority opinion by Chief Justice Mike McGrath. The alleged violation of that right gave the youth plaintiffs standing to sue, the state supreme court said in the Dec. 18 opinion.
Law360, the Hill and the Daily Montanan are among the publications with coverage.
The state had argued that delegates at the 1972 state constitutional convention didn’t intend to address climate change because it wasn’t discussed. Montana also argued that state efforts to address climate change wouldn’t have an impact without global action.
But the majority said constitutional delegates didn’t have to contemplate every constitutional harm that would be protected. Nor would they “grant the state a free pass to pollute the Montana environment just because the rest of the world insisted on doing so,” McGrath wrote.
A concurring judge agreed on the constitutional issue.
But the concurrence said solutions to global warming are in federal and international public policy choices, “rather than in a flashy headline-grabbing rights-based legal case in Montana.”
A dissenting judge argued that the plaintiffs did not have standing.
Chase Scheuer, the press secretary for the Montana Department of Justice, said the ruling was “disappointing but not surprising,” according to coverage by the Hill.
“The majority of the state supreme court justices yet again ruled in favor of their ideologically aligned allies and ignored the fact that Montana has no power to impact the climate,” Scheuer said.
The case is Held v. Montana.
See also:
Montana’s disregard of climate change violates right to clean environment, judge rules
Nation’s first youth climate lawsuits to go to trial
