Justices turned away an appeal of a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling.
The U.S. Supreme Court on March 24 declined to hear an appeal in a lawsuit led by minors that alleged the U.S. government has unconstitutionally deprived the children of rights to life and liberty by causing climate change to worsen.
Justices in an unsigned decision denied certiorari to a petition from Kelsey Cascadia Rose Juliana and 20 other minors. No justices offered an explanation for the decision.
Plaintiffs sued the government in 2015, alleging that the U.S. government for decades “has known that carbon dioxide (‘CO2’) pollution from burning fossil fuels was causing global warming and dangerous climate change, and that continuing to burn fossil fuels would destabilize the climate system on which present and future generations of our nation depend for their wellbeing and survival.”
Actions taken despite that knowledge, including the approval of a liquid natural gas terminal in Oregon, endangered the youth, the suit said.
In a split decision, a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit panel
decided in 2020 that the relief the plaintiffs sought, including an order mandating the government develop a plan to phase out fossil fuel emissions, “is beyond our constitutional power.” The court instructed U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken to dismiss the case.
Aiken declined, allowing plaintiffs to amend their complaint. In 2023, she ruled in favor of the minors,
finding that plaintiffs had adequately alleged that their constitutional rights were being infringed by the government’s actions. “The judiciary is capable and duty-bound to provide redress for the irreparable harm government fossil fuel promotion has caused,” the judge said at the time.
The Ninth Circuit in 2024 again sided with the government,
upholding the 2020 ruling and telling Aiken to dismiss the litigation.
Plaintiffs lodged a petition with the Supreme Court, asking justices to intervene. That led to Monday’s denial.
“Ultimately, we didn’t get the decision we wanted today, but we’ve had many wins along the way,” Miko Vergun, one of the plaintiffs,
said in a statement. “For almost ten years, we’ve stood up for the rights of present and future generations, demanding a world where we can not only survive, but thrive. We’ve faced extreme resistance by the federal government, yet we’ve never wavered in our resolve. All great movements have faced obstacles, but what sets them apart is the perseverance of the people behind them. We’ve shown the world that young people will not be ignored, and I’m incredibly proud of the impact Juliana v. United States has made.”
Plaintiffs say their case helped influence other cases that had resulted in positive rulings, including the 2024 Montana Supreme Court ruling that
found the state violated residents’ constitutional right to a clean environment by issuing permits for oil, gas, and coal projects without considering impacts on the environment.
The U.S. Department of Justice welcomed the Supreme Court’s rejection of the plaintiffs in the Oregon case.
“For nearly a decade, lawyers for the plaintiffs in the Juliana case have tied up the United States in litigation, persisting even after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals twice instructed the case to be dismissed because the plaintiffs lack Article III standing,” acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson
said in a statement. “The U.S. Supreme Court’s cert denial brings this long saga to a conclusion.”
