Youngsters want a 'clean environment'. Now they are suing state of Montana

Do people have the right to a “clean and healthful environment”?

This question is at the heart of a landmark trial in the United States – a group of 16 young activists seeking to hold their state Montana accountable for promoting fossil fuel and breaching their constitutional right to a clean environment.

The lawsuit, Held v. Montana, has gained national attention due to its potential to establish a precedent for comparable cases throughout the US and beyond. Legal challenges like this one have frequently been dismissed before reaching the courtroom.

The lawsuit comes amid young activists taking the centrestage in the battle against the growing climate crisis fuelled by human activities, including the use of greenhouse gas-emitting fossil fuels.

The group of youths aged up to 22 have come forward as plaintiffs, asserting that they have suffered harm from the “dangerous impacts of fossil fuels and the climate crisis”, with children being particularly susceptible to the worsening effects.

During a recent court hearing, Rikki Held, a member of the lead plaintiffs and a Montana rancher, gave emotional testimony about the devastating effects of wildfires, extreme temperatures, and drought on her family's livelihood and overall well-being. Held's testimony shed light on the challenges faced by ranchers in the region and the urgent need for action to address these issues.

"I remember the wildfires burning 70 miles of power lines, so we lost electricity for about a month," resulting in cattle dying because ranchers couldn't pump water and because drought led to a shortage of grass, said Held.

In 2021, smoke from wildfires choked the air "all summer," sending ash falling from the sky, triggering mass evacuations, and impacting the family's motel business, the 22-year-old environmental science graduate added.

The case is being overseen by Judge Kathy Seeley in the western state's capital Helena. The trial is scheduled to run until June 23.

At its heart is a provision within the fossil fuel-friendly state's constitution that guarantees: "The state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations."

As an initial move towards enacting policy improvements, the plaintiffs are not seeking financial compensation but rather a statement that their fundamental rights have been violated.

'Betrayal'

Specifically, they are challenging the constitutionality of the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) provision, which prohibits government agencies from considering climate impacts when reviewing permitting applications from fossil fuel interests.

They are also suing to have equal rights as adults enforced under the Montana Constitution.

In his opening statement, advocate Roger Sullivan evoked the multiplying impacts of global warming on the state's youth.

He said these included "heat, drought, wildfires, air pollution, violent storms, loss of wildlife, watching glaciers melt," with medical and psychological impacts disproportionately impacting the young.

Moreover, the state had pursued a ruinous energy policy, releasing 166 million tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually, he added - equivalent to the countries of Argentina, the Netherlands, or Pakistan, despite Montana's population of just over a million.

The plaintiffs felt a sense of "betrayal," said Sullivan, with some expressing reluctance to have their own children because they fear the world they would grow up in. Several have been directly impacted in their ability to fish and hunt, harming their families' economic well-being as well as their tribal practices, in the case of an Indigenous plaintiff.

For its part, the state has repeatedly tried to have the case tossed out over procedural issues.

In opening remarks, Montana Assistant Attorney General Michael Russell said the court "will hear lots of emotion, lots of assumptions, accusations... and notably fear about what the future may hold, including sweeping and dramatic assertions of doom that awaits us all."

He said the legislation under challenge could not have caused the plaintiffs' alleged injuries. "Climate change is a global issue that effectively relegates Montana's role to that of a spectator," said Russell.

The trial takes place against the backdrop of numerous jurisdictions in the United States filing lawsuits against fossil fuel companies for climate impacts and disinformation campaigns related to climate science.

"US courts have never been more relevant," said a former Barack Obama climate advisor and Climate Crisis Advisory Group member, Alice Hill.

"Everyone from kids to local governments is suing, asserting harm from climate change, and cases range from claims that fossil fuel companies lied about climate change to averments that states have violated constitutional rights."

As Held v. Montana continues, its outcome may shape the trajectory of climate-related litigation and policy reforms nationwide, amplifying the voices of young activists who are demanding a sustainable and equitable future for generations to come.