The first trial related to climate change in the United States opened Monday in Montana. A dozen young people have sued this state in the northwestern United States. 20 minutes returns to this trial which promises to be “historic”, according to the American media.
What is this court case?
Sixteen plaintiffs, ages 5 to 22, filed suit against Montana, accusing it of violating their constitutional right to a “clean and healthy environment.” The young plaintiffs say the ‘dangerous effects of fossil fuels and the climate crisis’ have harmed them – with children ‘singularly vulnerable’ to these worsening effects. They also question the constitutionality of a Montana law that prohibits the local government from considering climate impacts when deciding whether or not to grant permits to fossil fuel companies.
Why is this trial considered “historic”?
On several occasions, Montana has tried to have the charges dismissed for reasons of procedural error, but on June 6, the State Supreme Court gave the green light for the trial to begin. The “Held v. Montana”, during which climatologist Steve Running is called to testify by the prosecution, will therefore take place until June 23 in Helena, capital of Montana.
At the heart of the debates, therefore, this article of the local constitution stating that “the State and everyone must maintain and improve a clean and healthy environment in Montana for present and future generations”. The case “Held v. Montana” is thus closely scrutinized because its result could support other lawsuits initiated across the United States, targeting both the fossil fuel industry and the authorities. This while according to lawyer Roger Sullivan, Montana would have led a disastrous energy policy, releasing 166 million tons of CO2 each year into the atmosphere, the equivalent of a country like Argentina while the State does not has just over a million inhabitants.
What are the arguments put forward by the young plaintiffs?
Lead plaintiff Rikki Held, whose family owns a ranch in eastern Montana, recounted how their way of life has been directly affected by the increasingly raging wildfires, extreme temperatures, and drought. frequently this State renowned for its green landscapes. Rikki Held, 22, spoke of a forest fire that knocked out power lines and knocked out power to their ranch for a month, causing livestock to die as the family could not pump water. By 2021, smoke and ash from the fires had saturated the air “all summer,” said the environmental science graduate.
For his part, climatologist Steve Running presented, on Monday, the scientific evidence of the responsibility of man in global warming. And to specify that Montana, for example, experiences shorter winters, lengthening the fire season.
In his opening remarks, attorney Roger Sullivan listed the effects of global warming on Montana’s youth: “heat, drought, wildfires, air pollution, violent storms, disappearance of local wildlife, melting glaciers , loss of pillars and family and cultural traditions” and also the medical and psychological damage.
What are the arguments advanced by the State of Montana?
Montana Attorney General Michael Russell told him that during Monday’s proceedings, the court would hear “guesses” about “what the future may hold, including sweeping and bombastic claims about a tragic fate that awaits us all.” . According to him, the law at the heart of the trial proceedings cannot be the cause of the damages of which the plaintiffs claimed to be victims. “Montana’s (CO2) emissions are just too tiny to make any difference,” Russell said, calling climate change a “global issue” in which the state played a “mere bystander” role. .
Michael Burger, executive director of the Sabin Center for Climate Law at Columbia University, assures him that governments and the fossil fuel industry tend to say “nothing should be done until everyone not agree to do everything, and that no individual contribution can be large enough to count”.
What do the 16 plaintiffs want?
Rikki Held and the 15 other young plaintiffs are not demanding any restitution, but are asking for a statement to be drawn up stating that their rights are being infringed. This should be a first step towards legislative action.