Ventura, CA – Last week brought good news for youth plaintiffs and climate activist leaders who are frustrated with inaction on the climate crisis in the face of record breaking heat waves, wide-spread drought, rampant wildfires, and other extreme weather. The good news came in the form of a ruling by Judge Gisela Triana from the Texas District Court, determining that the atmosphere is a natural resource due protection under the Public Trust Doctrine and the Texas constitution (Angela Bonser-Lain, et al. v Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Case No. D-1-GN-11-002194). However, Judge Triana denied plaintiff’s request for rulemaking based on the finding, due to other similar pending litigation over TCEQ regulations.
The case in Texas is one of 10 other open Atmospheric Trust Litigation (ATL) cases in the United States, all filed by youth plaintiffs associated with the iMatter Campaign of Kids v.Global Warming. Relying on the long-established principle of the Public Trust Doctrine, the suits require governments to protect and maintain certain shared resources fundamental to their generation’s health and survival. Young people, tired of the political and corporate interventions blocking any meaningful legislation to address climate change, turned to the courts in an effort to hold their governments accountable.
Triana’s ruling declaring the atmosphere as a protected resource under the Public Trust provides a persuasive authority for other suits, based on the same legal theory. Other cases pending on appeal include Arizona, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, Montana, and Minnesota. All youth plaintiffs request courts to compel state agencies to reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuels consistent with the amount prescribed by scientific analysis.
Only a few days after the Texas ruling, Judge Sarah Singleton, from the District Court of New Mexico, issued an order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss and their request for an immediate appeal (Sanders, et al. v. Martinez, S., et al. No. D-101-CV-2011-1514.) The order recognizes that “Plaintiffs have made a substantive allegation that . . . the state is ignoring the atmosphere with respect to greenhouse gas emissions.” The case will move forward to decide whether the State of New Mexico has met its obligation to protect the atmosphere for current and future generations. Eighteen-year-old iMatter leader and co- plaintiff, Akilah Sanders Reed, responded to the decision, “The longer my state’s leaders refuse to uphold their public trust obligations, the worse off we will all be. Judge Singleton’s decision gives me hope that New Mexico may be willing to step up and be accountable to my generation before it is too late.”
The teenage plaintiffs in the federal ATL case recently filed a motion to reconsider after the U.S. District Court declined to hear the merits of their claim asserting that the federal government has a constitutional responsibility to protect the atmosphere on behalf of present and future generations. This followed Judge Robert Wilkin’s order to dismiss the lawsuit (Alec L. v. Jackson, D.D.C., No. 11-CV-022235) on May 31st, granting the motions of the federal defendants and the fossil fuel industry intervener-defendants. “This case is about the fundamental nature of our government, our constitutional system and the relationship between citizens and the government” said Phil Gregory of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs. “It is about protecting fundamental rights and ordering the government to take immediate steps to prevent the destruction of the essential natural resources held in trust for all citizens.”
The case in Texas is one of 10 other open Atmospheric Trust Litigation (ATL) cases in the United States, all filed by youth plaintiffs associated with the iMatter Campaign of Kids v.Global Warming. Relying on the long-established principle of the Public Trust Doctrine, the suits require governments to protect and maintain certain shared resources fundamental to their generation’s health and survival. Young people, tired of the political and corporate interventions blocking any meaningful legislation to address climate change, turned to the courts in an effort to hold their governments accountable.
Triana’s ruling declaring the atmosphere as a protected resource under the Public Trust provides a persuasive authority for other suits, based on the same legal theory. Other cases pending on appeal include Arizona, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, Montana, and Minnesota. All youth plaintiffs request courts to compel state agencies to reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuels consistent with the amount prescribed by scientific analysis.
Only a few days after the Texas ruling, Judge Sarah Singleton, from the District Court of New Mexico, issued an order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss and their request for an immediate appeal (Sanders, et al. v. Martinez, S., et al. No. D-101-CV-2011-1514.) The order recognizes that “Plaintiffs have made a substantive allegation that . . . the state is ignoring the atmosphere with respect to greenhouse gas emissions.” The case will move forward to decide whether the State of New Mexico has met its obligation to protect the atmosphere for current and future generations. Eighteen-year-old iMatter leader and co- plaintiff, Akilah Sanders Reed, responded to the decision, “The longer my state’s leaders refuse to uphold their public trust obligations, the worse off we will all be. Judge Singleton’s decision gives me hope that New Mexico may be willing to step up and be accountable to my generation before it is too late.”
The teenage plaintiffs in the federal ATL case recently filed a motion to reconsider after the U.S. District Court declined to hear the merits of their claim asserting that the federal government has a constitutional responsibility to protect the atmosphere on behalf of present and future generations. This followed Judge Robert Wilkin’s order to dismiss the lawsuit (Alec L. v. Jackson, D.D.C., No. 11-CV-022235) on May 31st, granting the motions of the federal defendants and the fossil fuel industry intervener-defendants. “This case is about the fundamental nature of our government, our constitutional system and the relationship between citizens and the government” said Phil Gregory of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs. “It is about protecting fundamental rights and ordering the government to take immediate steps to prevent the destruction of the essential natural resources held in trust for all citizens.”
The coordinated nation-wide legal action, a partnership between Kids vs. Global Warming/iMatter, Our Children’s Trust, and WITNESS, is a distinctive and historic effort combining legal action, youth advocacy, and film. The 10-part documentary series highlights the stories of nine of the youth plaintiffs, focusing on how they have been affected by climate change. The campaign is significant in that it frames the issue of climate change as a human rights issue, not as political, or even primarily environmental Eighteen year old, Alec Loorz, federal plaintiff and founder of Kids vs. Global Warming, ended his film saying, “We are asking courts to stand up and do the brave thing on behalf of their children and grandchildren…because our government has the legal responsibility to protect the atmosphere for future generations.” At least one brave judge has done just that so far.
