Quick summary:
• The Montana Supreme Court ruled in favor of youth plaintiffs in a landmark climate case, affirming their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment.
• The court’s decision requires Montana to assess greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts for all future fossil fuel projects.
• The ruling struck down a 2021 state law that barred climate considerations in environmental reviews, deeming it unconstitutional.
• Plaintiffs, aged 7 to 23, described how climate change has disrupted their lives, with worsening wildfires, drought, and ecological damage in Montana.
• The court rejected Montana’s argument that its emissions are too small to impact global climate change, emphasizing the state’s responsibility to lead by example.
• Montana Republican leaders criticized the ruling, warning of economic consequences and accusing the court of overreach.
• Youth plaintiffs and advocates hailed the decision as a major victory for climate action and a precedent for similar lawsuits nationwide.
In a historic decision, the Montana Supreme Court has upheld a lower court ruling that the state government violated its constitution by permitting fossil fuel projects without considering their climate impacts. The case, Held v. State of Montana, brought by 16 young Montanans, argued that the state’s promotion of oil, gas, and coal development infringed upon their constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment.”
“This ruling is a victory not just for us, but for every young person whose future is threatened by climate change,” said Rikki Held, the lead plaintiff, in a statement. “We have been heard, and today the Montana Supreme Court has affirmed that our rights to a safe and healthy climate cannot be ignored.”
The court’s 6-1 decision makes Montana the first state supreme court to affirm that youth have constitutional protections from climate harm. The ruling is expected to have far-reaching implications for fossil fuel regulation and youth-driven climate litigation.
Filed in 2020, the lawsuit marked a significant step in efforts to use constitutional rights to push governments toward climate action. The plaintiffs, ages 7 to 23 at the time of the ruling, described how climate change has affected their lives, citing worsening wildfires, water shortages, and ecological damage.
During the trial, youth plaintiffs provided testimony about how extreme weather linked to climate change had disrupted their families’ livelihoods and Montana’s natural beauty. One plaintiff highlighted how diminished snowpack has affected rivers vital for farming, fishing, and recreation.
Chief Justice Mike McGrath, writing for the majority, underscored that Montana’s constitution requires the state to proactively protect its environment, stating that the framers intended for “the strongest, all-encompassing environmental protections in the nation, both anticipatory and preventative, for present and future generations.”
The court dismissed the state’s argument that Montana’s contributions to global greenhouse gas emissions were too small to matter. “The plaintiffs can enforce their environmental rights without requiring everyone else to stop jumping off bridges or adding fuel to the fire,” McGrath wrote.
The decision also struck down a 2021 Montana law barring environmental reviews from considering climate impacts unless the federal government regulated carbon dioxide emissions. The court ruled the law unconstitutional, reinforcing Montana’s obligation to evaluate greenhouse gas emissions in its fossil fuel permitting processes.
“The Montana Supreme Court’s decision compels the state to carefully assess the greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts of all future fossil fuel permits,” said Melissa Hornbein, senior attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center and one of the plaintiffs’ lawyers.
The court’s ruling sets a new precedent for how states must address climate change. Montana agencies must now include climate assessments in the approval process for all fossil fuel projects, aligning the state’s regulatory practices with its constitutional mandate for environmental protection.
This decision could inspire similar legal challenges in states with strong constitutional protections for the environment, such as Hawaii, Massachusetts, and New York. It also aligns with growing global momentum for youth-led climate action, including recent victories like Navahine v. Hawaii Department of Transportation, which secured significant environmental concessions earlier this year.
“This ruling is not just a win for Montana—it’s a signal to the world that youth-led climate action is powerful and effective,” said plaintiff Kian.
While youth plaintiffs and environmental advocates celebrated the ruling, Montana’s Republican leadership expressed dismay. Attorney General Austin Knudsen called the decision “disappointing, but not surprising,” accusing the court of siding with “ideologically aligned allies.”
Governor Greg Gianforte criticized the ruling as judicial overreach, warning of potential economic consequences. “This decision does nothing more than declare open season on Montana’s all-of-the-above approach to energy,” he said, referencing the state’s reliance on both fossil fuels and renewables.
A day before the ruling, Gianforte convened energy stakeholders to discuss strategies for increasing fossil fuel production in Montana. Meanwhile, Knudsen filed his 59th lawsuit against the Biden administration, challenging its plan to limit coal production in the Powder River Basin, a major source of Montana’s coal industry revenue.
Despite resistance, the ruling has energized youth plaintiffs and their advocates, who are calling for swift action to implement the court’s decision.
“Today, the Montana Supreme Court has affirmed the constitutional rights of youth to a safe and livable climate, confirming that the future of our children cannot be sacrificed for fossil fuel interests,” said Nate Bellinger, an attorney with Our Children’s Trust, which supported the case.
“Clean energy offers economic benefits and new jobs,” said plaintiff Georgi. “We look forward to working with the state to implement this transition and ensure that Montana leads the way in tackling the climate crisis.”
The ruling in Held v. State of Montana underscores the growing role of youth in climate activism and litigation. By holding governments accountable for their environmental responsibilities, these cases highlight the potential for legal action to drive meaningful climate policy.
Whether Montana’s leadership will comply with the ruling remains uncertain, but the court has made one thing clear: constitutional protections for the environment must be honored, even in the face of political and economic challenges.
“This ruling is a monumental moment for Montana, our youth, and the future of our planet,” said Bellinger. “Montana’s Constitution does not grant the state a free pass to ignore climate change because others fail to act.”
To learn more about the youth climate movement, visit https://www.sunrisemovement.org/.
COMMENTS