HELENA, Mont. — Republican officials in Montana will ask the state Supreme Court on Wednesday to groundbreaking climate ruling which says regulators must take into account emissions that contribute to global warming when approving oil, gas and coal projects.
A lower court ruling last year – after a unprecedented ordeal in a lawsuit brought by young environmental activists — was seen as a breakthrough in efforts to use the courts to influence policies to combat climate change.
But to set a lasting legal precedent, it must be upheld by the state Supreme Court. That could push fossil-fuel-friendly Montana to adopt policies that better protect the environment and also influence future climate change cases in other states such as Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and New York, which, like Montana, have state constitutional protections for the environment.
If the Supreme Court were to overturn the ruling, it would be another step in the long list of defeats for lawyers representing young people in climate cases.
“The bottom line is that whatever the state Supreme Court decides is probably more important than the trial court ruling,” said David Driesen, a Syracuse University professor and expert on environmental law.
Officials in Hawaii, who recently faced a similar lawsuit from young environmental activists, agreed a settlement which includes an ambitious demand to decarbonise the state’s transport system over the next 21 years. And in April, Europe’s highest The Court of Human Rights ruled that countries must better protect their populations against the consequences of climate changesiding with a group of older Swiss women against their government, in a ruling that could have implications across the continent.
These cases and the Montana lawsuit have resulted in a small number of rulings in which a government duty to protect citizens of climate change. Driesen said the effects of the lawsuit on energy policy have been largely indirect, but as rulings pile up, it could increase political pressure on energy companies to invest in cleaner technologies.
The Montana ruling, which has had little practical effect so far, has been criticized by Republicans who control the state’s legislative and executive branches.
“The district court gave the plaintiffs their show trial last June, but it is now time for the state Supreme Court to do its job and overturn the flawed decision that followed,” said Chase Scheuer, press secretary for state Attorney General Austin Knudsen. Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte also urged a reversal.
Attorneys for the state argue that the amount of greenhouse gases released by fossil fuel projects in Montana is negligible compared to global emissions and that reducing them would have no significant effect on the climate.
The young plaintiffs in the case testified during the trial that their lives have been profoundly affected by climate change: increasing wildfires pollute the air they breathe, while decreasing snowfall and droughts deplete rivers needed for farming, fishing, wildlife and recreation.
Environmentalists have cited the court ruling in lawsuits challenging permits for a natural gas plant, an oil refinery, a pipeline and a coal mine, court documents show.
However, the lawsuits have not yet been served on state officials as activists await the Supreme Court’s ruling, said Derf Johnson of the Montana Environmental Information Center, one of the plaintiffs in the cases.
In March, regulators began looking in some cases at greenhouse gas emissions that are driving climate change. But environmentalists complain that the assessments are superficial and fail to take into account the widespread damage that climate change is doing.
“The state needs to start evaluating the individual projects. That’s what this is all about,” Johnson said.
District Judge Kathy Seeley said in her August 2023 ruling that it would be up to the Legislature to determine how to align the policy, reducing the likelihood of rapid change in a state that favors fossil fuels.
Numerous individuals and organizations filed briefs in support of the plaintiffs ahead of Wednesday’s oral arguments, including Native American tribes, health experts, outdoor recreation companies and athletes such as acclaimed mountaineer Conrad Anker.
Republican legislative leaders, oil and gas interests, natural resource developers, the Montana Chamber of Commerce and the state’s largest utility, NorthWestern Energy, are supporting the state. NorthWestern is building a gas-fired power station along the Yellowstone River near Billings, which played a major role in the dispute over greenhouse gas emissions.
Carbon dioxide, released during the combustion of fossil fuels, traps heat in the atmosphere and is largely responsible for global warming.
According to the European climate service Copernicus, June marked the 13th consecutive month of record temperatures on Earth and was also the 12th consecutive month in which it was 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than in pre-industrial times.
The Montana Constitution requires agencies to “maintain and improve” a clean environment, a law Gianforte signed last year said environmental assessments may not take into account climate impacts unless the federal government makes carbon dioxide a regulated pollutant.
___
Brown reported from Billings.