The Montana Supreme Court voted 6 to 1, affirming a lower court ruling that said the state’s fossil fuel friendly policies, along with a lack of action to address climate change, has violated the young people’s constitutional right to a clean environment. The decision means that state agencies must now consider the greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts of any proposed development project.

Olivia Vesovich is one of the youth plaintiffs. She’s been involved with this case for the last 5 years.

“Hope is something we work towards, and that is what this case has been,” said Vesovich. “We have fought to have our voices heard. We have fought to have our case in the state and now that we got our voices heard by the Montana Supreme Court.”

Statements from the Governor and Attorney General’s spokespeople reiterated their arguments from the appeal that the young people lacked standing to bring this case and that climate change is beyond the scope of the courts.

Republican lawmakers called the decision an overstep from the court into the legislature’s role. Democratic leadership praised the decision. Environmental groups heralded the decision as a critical victory in the fight against climate change.

Montana is one of 6 states with environmental protections enshrined in its constitution.

Columbia University climate change law professor Michael Gerrard says although this ruling is specific to Montana, it sets an important precedent for other climate litigation.

“I think this kind of victory will embolden youth plaintiffs and others to bring similar cases in other parts of the country, and here the trial court, now referred by the state Supreme Court, upheld all the findings of the climate scientists. It’s going to be increasingly hard for anyone to challenge those scientific findings,” said Gerrard.

Given that the case is predicated on Montana’s Constitution, this ruling is the final decision. It cannot be appealed to a federal court.

Montana’s Supreme Court has upheld a lower court’s decision that had sided with 16 young activists who argued that the state violated their right to a clean environment.

The lawsuit was brought by students arguing that a state law banning the consideration of climate when choosing energy policy was unconstitutional.

In a 6-to-1 ruling, the top court found that the plaintiffs, between ages five and 22, had a “fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment”.

Wednesday’s ruling came after a district court’s decision last year was appealed by the state. Similar climate lawsuits are ongoing across the US but this is first of its kind a from a state supreme court.

The lawsuit targeted a 2011 state law that made it illegal for environmental reviews to consider climate impacts when deciding on new projects, like building new power plants.

It cited a 50-year-old constitutional clause that guaranteed the “state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations”.

The ruling on Wednesday stated that the “plaintiffs showed at trial – without dispute – that climate change is harming Montana’s environmental life support system now and with increasing severity for the foreseeable future” .

Rikki Held, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, said in a statement that “this ruling is a victory not just for us, but for every young person whose future is threatened by climate change”.

Montana state officials expressed disappointment with the court’s decision.

Governor Greg Gianforte said his office was still assessing the ruling, but predicted the impact would be “perpetual lawsuits that will waste taxpayer dollars and drive up energy bills for hardworking Montanans”.

Western Environmental Law Center, which represented the young plaintiffs, said in a statement that the decision marks “a turning point in Montana’s energy policy”.

It said plaintiffs and their legal team “are committed to ensuring the full implementation of the ruling”.

Similar cases are scheduled to be heard in several other states, including Hawaii, Utah and Alaska, as well as in countries like Australia, New Zealand, Pakistan, Colombia and Uganda.

What’s New

The Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday affirmed a landmark climate decision that declared the state was violating residents’ constitutional right to a clean environment by allowing oil, gas and coal projects without regard for global warming.

Why It Matters

The decision reinforces an August 2023 ruling by District Court Judge Kathy Seeley, who found that Montana’s practices violated its residents’ constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment.”

This pivotal case, spearheaded by a group of young plaintiffs aged 6 to 23, represented a milestone for climate advocates seeking judicial intervention to compel governmental action on climate change.

What To Know

On Wednesday in a 6-1 ruling, the Montana Supreme Court upheld the August 2023 decision.

The court’s decision strikes down a state policy that prohibited the consideration of greenhouse gas emissions in granting permits for fossil fuel development.

The state had previously appealed the ruling by Seeley, and arguments were heard in July, in which the state argued that greenhouse gases released from Montana fossil fuel projects are minuscule on a global scale and reducing them would have no effect on climate change.

Chief Justice Mike McGrath dismissed the state’s argument that Montana’s emissions are insignificant on a global scale, likening the defense to an “everyone else is doing it” excuse.

McGrath wrote, “The right to a clean and healthful environment is meaningless if the State abdicates its responsibility to protect it.”

What Are People Saying

Melissa Hornbein, an attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center and attorney for the plaintiffs said, “With the ruling now in place, 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.”

Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote for the majority: “Plaintiffs may enforce their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment against the State, which owes them that affirmative duty, without requiring everyone else to stop jumping off bridges or adding fuel to the fire. Otherwise the right to a clean and healthful environment is meaningless.”

Republican Governor Greg Gianforte said in a statement that the state was still reviewing the decision, but said it will lead to “perpetual lawsuits that will waste taxpayer dollars and drive up energy bills for hardworking Montanans.

Pushback From State Leadership

The ruling has sparked a backlash from Gianforte, who criticized the court for what he described as judicial overreach. He warned the decision could invite an onslaught of lawsuits, increase energy costs for Montanans and hinder the state’s “all-of-the-above” energy strategy.

“This Court continues to step outside of its lane to tread on the right of the Legislature, the elected representatives of the people, to make policy,” he said in a statement. “This decision does nothing more than declare open season on Montana’s all-of-the-above approach to energy, which is key to providing affordable and reliable energy to homes, schools, and businesses across our state.”

Gianforte also convened energy stakeholders earlier this week to discuss boosting production to meet rising demand, emphasizing the need for “unleashing American energy” to maintain grid stability.

The Plaintiffs’ Perspective

For the 16 young plaintiffs, the court’s decision validates their personal struggles with the tangible effects of climate change. In a Wednesday statement, lead plaintiff Rikki Held called the ruling “a victory not just for us, but for every young person whose future is threatened by climate change.”

During the trial, the plaintiffs described how worsening wildfires, droughts and diminishing snowpack have disrupted their lives, polluted the air and depleted vital natural resources. They argued that the state’s failure to address these challenges imperils their future and violates their constitutional rights.

What Happens Next

The ruling has positioned Montana as a flashpoint in the national debate over climate accountability, potentially inspiring similar legal challenges across the United States.

This article includes reporting from The Associated Press.