The first climate change-related trial in the United States opened Monday in Montana after a dozen young people filed lawsuits against the northwestern state, accusing it of violating their constitutional right to a “clean and healthy environment.”
The case called “Hero v. Montana” is under scrutiny as its outcome could support other lawsuits across the country targeting both the fossil fuel industry and law enforcement.
The 16 plaintiffs, aged 5 to 22, say the “dangerous effects of fossil fuels and the climate crisis” have hurt them – with children being “particularly vulnerable” to these aggravating effects.
Lead Plaintiff Rikki Held, whose family owns a ranch in eastern Montana, shared how increasingly raging wildfires, extreme temperatures and drought have directly impacted her way of life. This state is often known for its green landscapes.
Rikki Held, 22, spoke of a wildfire that knocked out power lines and cut off power to her ranch for a month, killing livestock because the family couldn’t pump water.
By 2021, smoke and ash from the fires would have saturated the air “all summer,” the environmental sciences graduate said.
Multiplied Effects
At the heart of the debates was an article of the local constitution that states, “The state and all of Montana must maintain and enhance a clean and healthy environment for present and future generations.”
Plaintiffs are also challenging the constitutionality of a Montana statute that prohibits local government from considering the impact of climate when deciding whether to issue permits to companies that operate fossil fuels.
They are not seeking damages, but are asking for a statement to be drawn up stating that their rights are being violated. This should be a first step towards legislative action.
In his opening remarks, attorney Roger Sullivan discussed the impact of global warming on Montana’s youth.
“Heat, drought, wildfires, air pollution, violent storms, disappearance of native wildlife, melting glaciers, loss of pillars and family and cultural traditions,” he listed, also referring to the medical and psychological damage.
In addition, the attorney argued that the state had run disastrous energy policies and was releasing 166 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year, the equivalent of a country like Argentina (not counting Montana) of just over a million people.
Climatologist Steve Running, called by prosecutors to testify on Monday, presented scientific evidence of human responsibility for global warming. Montana, for example, is experiencing shorter winters that lengthen fire season, he noted.
“Viewers”
The state made multiple attempts to have the lawsuits dismissed on the grounds of procedural violations, but on June 6 the state Supreme Court gave the green light for the trial to begin. It runs through June 23 in Helena, the capital of Montana.
Montana Attorney General Michael Russell told him that during the trial the court would hear “conjectures” about “what the future may hold, including sweeping and bombastic claims about a tragic fate that awaits us all.”
According to him, the law underlying the court case cannot be the cause of the damage claimed by the plaintiffs.
“Montana’s (CO2) emissions are just too small to make any difference,” Russell said, calling climate change a “global problem” in which the state is playing a “mere spectator role.”
Such arguments are common, Michael Burger, director general of the Sabin Center for Climate Law at Columbia University, told AFP.
In his opinion, governments and the fossil fuel industry tend to say: “Nothing should be done until all agree to do everything, and that no individual contribution can be large enough to count.”