Youth and courts have given Pres. Biden a solution to the climate crisis. He should use it.
By Alex Loznak and Avery McRae
May 3, 2024
Left to right: Juliana v. U.S. youth plaintiffs Miko, Alex, Jacob and Levi at the My Voice. My Rights. Our Future. Rally to #SaveJuliana at the White House on April 21, 2024. (Photo by Robin Loznak)
In the landmark Held v. State of Montana decision last year, a trial court found in favor of 16 children and young adults who sued the state for its role in contributing to climate change. As two of the 21 youth plaintiffs in another Constitutional climate case, Juliana v. United States, we believe this groundbreaking decision can light a path toward comprehensive climate action at the federal level.
The Held court found that the “right to a clean and healthful environment,” under the state constitution—along with such fundamental rights as dignity, health and safety, and equal protection of the law—“includes climate as part of the environmental life-support system.” The court declared that Montana’s greenhouse gas emissions are injuring youth, and it found it unconstitutional and overturned a Montana law that prohibited state agencies from considering climate change when deciding whether to issue permits for fossil fuel activities.
Professor Michael Gerrard at Columbia Law School rightly noted that Held “is the strongest decision on climate change ever issued by any court.” Indeed, it represents the first time that a court on U.S. soil has set aside a law enacted by the state legislature on the basis that it infringes the constitutional right to a stable climate.
On Earth Day, President Biden described the climate crisis as an “existential threat” that requires, “bold and clear action.”
One of his bold and clear actions should be letting Held guide our climate solutions. Unfortunately, the president has not yet taken that step.
Rather than letting this powerful decision be the foundation for approaching federal cases, in Juliana, the Department of Justice is bringing its full weight down with extreme tactics to silence those of us who brought it.
In Juliana, we and our co-plaintiffs assert that the U.S. government is violating our constitutional rights to life, liberty and equality through actions that exacerbate climate change, such as producing fossil fuels on federal lands.
This month, DOJ sought to delay Juliana by requesting for an unprecedented seventh time a writ of mandamus. This maneuver—which the department itself says “should only be used in exceptional circumstances”—would keep evidence from being heard at all, on the ridiculous grounds that it’s too expensive for the department to have to defend the suit.
Juliana has been in court for nine years. When we joined as plaintiffs, one of us had just graduated from high school; the other was ten years old. This case has been stalled by the government for half our lives.
Since filing the case, one of us, Alex, moved from a family farm in Oregon, graduated from Columbia University, then returned to the west coast to earn a law degree and pass the Oregon bar. The other, Avery, who held an event for endangered species in kindergarten, is now a first-year student at Eckerd College in Florida, studying environmental studies and political science. We and our co-plaintiffs have shared the joys and challenges that define young people's lives today.
And like our peers throughout the country, we’ve come of age against the backdrop of a rapidly warming world and its devastations: bigger and hotter wildfires; frequent floods that force evacuation; air that’s unbreathable.
Juliana youth plaintiff Avery during a wildfire in Oregon. (Photo by Athena Delene)
Year after year, temperatures climbed while politicians continued pro-fossil-fuel policies that made matters worse. We lost precious time in the struggle to prevent global calamity. The U.S. Department of Justice under three administrations wasted this time, doing everything it could to keep our evidence from being heard in court.
But the Held decision in Montana shows that the evidence of climate harm to young people, perpetuated by our own governments, belongs in the light of day. The courts stand ready to hear this evidence and render judgment to hold governments accountable for their unconstitutional actions. Climate justice can and should be secured by the judiciary.
President Biden can bring the government’s shortsighted approach to Juliana to an end. Because of the important national issues at stake, this case deserves the president’s personal time and attention. At minimum, our “Climate President” should commit to a meeting with the Juliana 21 to discuss the best path forward for the case. He can demonstrate he represents all people in the U.S., including the young people who have made a crucial difference to his presidency thus far.
Held put to rest the erroneous notion that youth-led climate lawsuits are political statements or publicity stunts; they are serious legal cases that can result in judgments against government defendants and subsequent change.
The president should recognize Juliana’s extraordinary potential and exercise visionary leadership to help young Americans secure a durable solution to the climate crisis. We may only get one shot.
A favorable trial ruling in Juliana could also set the table for serious legal negotiations with the federal government that could result in a comprehensive, court-approved settlement agreement that would guide federal climate policy for decades.
We and the other Juliana plaintiffs have waited nearly a decade to see our day in court.
On Earth Day, President Biden called the country’s actions for the environment, “a moral imperative.”
We agree. This is a matter of right and wrong. And the right thing to do in our case is for
President Biden to end the Department of Justice’s opposition to a Juliana trial. Just as the courts in Montana rendered justice to protect the rights of youth, so should our federal courts. When they do, it will be the turning point in the fight to save humanity from climate chaos.
Alex Loznak and Avery McRae are plaintiffs in the constitutional climate case, Juliana v. United States.
