Montana’s Supreme Court debates climate law's constitutionality

A landmark climate lawsuit in Montana questions whether a state law supporting fossil fuel development infringes on constitutional rights to a healthy environment.

Nicholas Kusnetz and Najifa Farhat report for Inside Climate News.


In short:

  • Montana's Supreme Court heard arguments about a law that prohibits considering climate impacts in fossil fuel project approvals, challenged by 16 youths.
  • Plaintiffs argue the law violates Montana’s constitutional right to a "clean and healthful environment," with potential national implications.
  • The state’s defense claims Montana's emissions are too minor to affect global climate change, questioning the court's jurisdiction.

Key quote:

“Any environmental case that gets to the Supreme Court is dead on arrival. That’s why people are going to the states.”

— Patrick Parenteau, professor of law emeritus and senior fellow for climate policy at Vermont Law and Graduate School

Why this matters:

The case could set a precedent for constitutional climate rights, influencing environmental policy and legal actions nationwide, especially as federal regulations face challenges. Read more: Youth v. Montana — Young adults speak up.

About the author(s):

EHN Curators
EHN Curators
Articles curated and summarized by the Environmental Health News' curation team. Some AI-based tools helped produce this text, with human oversight, fact checking and editing.

You Might Also Like

Recent

Top environmental health news from around the world.

Environmental Health News

Your support of EHN, a newsroom powered by Environmental Health Sciences, drives science into public discussions. When you support our work, you support impactful journalism. It all improves the health of our communities. Thank you!

donate