JULIANA v. UNITED STATES

For nine years, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has aggressively filed motions to delay or dismiss this landmark constitutional climate case. On December 29, 2023, U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken ruled in favor of the Juliana 21, putting an end to the DOJ’s motions to dismiss the case, and allowing the youth plaintiffs to continue on the path to trial. The parties were set to receive trial dates from Judge Aiken on January 19, 2024.    

However, on February 2, 2024, the Biden Administration’s DOJ filed another motion for a stay and a petition for a writ of mandamus at the Ninth Circuit. This is an extreme legal tactic used by the Trump Administration to subvert the normal legal process, prevent the case from proceeding to trial, and silence the voices of young people seeking to highlight the injustice of climate change at the hands of the United States government. The Trump administration used this delay tactic a record six times, and now Biden’s DOJ has followed in their footsteps and filed it for an unprecedented seventh time.   

On April 19, 2024, Judge Ann Aiken rebuked the DOJs attempts to silence the 21 youth plaintiffs when she filed an answer to the DOJs seventh Petition for Writ of Mandamus and denied the DOJ’s motion to stay the case while the Ninth Circuit considers the mandamus request.  

“Trial courts across the country address complex cases involving similar jurisdictional, evidentiary, and legal questions as those presented here without resorting to interlocutory appeal or petitioning for a writ of mandamus,” Judge Aiken wrote. Quoting from an earlier case, she noted, “the proper place for the trial is in the trial court.”  

Despite the amicus brief filed by members of Congress and Judge Aiken's powerful filings in support of the youth plaintiffs, on May 1, 2024, the Ninth Circuit unjustly granted the DOJs outrageous seventh Petition for Writ of Mandamus. This decision offers a dire reminder that the courts are vital to a functioning democracy. The court’s opinion that declaring dangerous and discriminatory government systems unconstitutional doesn’t matter, is simply false.  

On June 17, 2024, the attorneys for the youth plaintiffs filed a petition for en banc rehearing with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and a motion to vacate the panel’s order to put the case back on the path to trial. They argued that the decision to dismiss Juliana disregards Supreme Court precedent established by Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Ct., effectively upending the limited scope of mandamus. By doing so, the court has taken it upon itself to determine which cases are allowed to proceed to final judgment at the district court level.  

Then on June 27, 2024, Members of Congress, children’s rights scholars, law professors and world-renowned climate experts, once again filed amicus briefs in support of the Juliana youth plaintiffs and on July 5th, the youth plaintiffs also responded, pointing out the principles of the Declaration of Independence and President Biden’s obligation to protect their rights. However, despite the outpouring of support and supplemental filings, on July 12, 2024, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the plaintiffs’ requests for rehearing or reconsideration en banc.  

“Twenty-one young leaders have been championing their rights, and the rights of future generations for nine years. They are quite simply asking to be heard—to have the opportunity to make their case, to be considered on the merits because their lives depend on it.” - Julia Olson, Our Children’s Trust Chief Legal Counsel and Co-Executive Director 

NOT BACKING DOWN!

In response to the Ninth Circuit’s disregard for the rule of law and jurisdiction, the Juliana 21 filed their own petition to SCOTUS on September 12, 2024, for a writ of mandamus to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse this egregious error and return the case to the district court—because the integrity of our courts and constitutional democracy rely on it. Unlike the DOJ, the Juliana plaintiffs meet the legal requirements to use the petition.   

On November 12, 2024, SCOTUS denied the petition for writ of mandamus filed by the 21 young Americans. While a writ of mandamus would have been an appropriate remedy to correct the Ninth Circuit’s extraordinary abuse of its own mandamus power, we knew the Supreme Court rarely uses that tool. 

Additionally, the Juliana plaintiffs have filed an application with Justice Kagan for an extension of time in which to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme, which was approved on September 17, 2024.  

Plaintiffs also indicated that they have reached out to the Biden Administration requesting settlement talks. In support, nearly 350,000 individuals from the U.S. and around the world signed petitions delivered to the President and Attorney General.