In a lawsuit that has been described as a “gamechanger” for climate and environmental law, a group of young adults from Montana have successfully sued the state for violating their constitutional right to a healthy environment. The suit is based on the theory that the state’s environmental laws, particularly with respect to fossil fuels, violated the state constitution, which guarantees its citizens a “clean and healthful environment.” Environmental activists are hoping that this will be the first of many similar lawsuits to help curtail climate emissions around the country.

What Was This Lawsuit About?

Several years ago, a group of sixteen young people, who ranged in age from five to twenty-two, filed a lawsuit against the state of Montana for violating their state constitutional rights. Earlier this year, the government amended the Montana Environmental Protection Act (MEPA) to specifically exclude the effects of greenhouse gas emissions from considerations when awarding energy contracts, including those for fossil fuel development. As a result, they said, Montana was deliberately contributing to climate change and damaging the environment, violating their rights.

What Was the Legal Issue Being Decided?

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Montana’s state constitution required the state to take climate factors into account when awarding energy contracts. The state argued that Montana’s contribution to climate change was too small to be meaningful, making the policy irrelevant to the health of the environment. The plaintiffs, meanwhile, argued that it did, given the importance of climate issues and the degree to which Montana’s policies were contributing to climate change.

What Did The Ruling Say?

The judge in the case ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, agreeing with their interpretation of the Montana state constitution, and invalidating the climate change exception in the MEPA. The judge also enjoined another state policy that would have made it harder for environmental groups to sue the state for MEPA violations. The judge declared these provisions unconstitutional, finding they violated the state constitution and did not further a legitimate state interest.

What Are the Implications of This Ruling?

One reason this ruling is so important is that it may act as a model for other similar lawsuits in other states. Many states have provisions that guarantee a right to a clean environment as part of their constitutions, and this lawsuit shows that considering climate issues may be required under those constitutional provisions. With the success of this case, other states might also be compelled to consider the effects of greenhouse gasses when creating their own energy and climate policies.
Williams Cedar is a law firm dedicated to helping clients with personal injury, environmental law, and civil rights cases. We specialize in assisting clients who have been injured due to exposure to environmental toxins, including veterans and their loved ones. If you need legal assistance due to toxic exposure or other related matters, please give us a call at our New Jersey and Pennsylvania offices at (215) 557-0099, or visit our contact page.

Share This