Juliana v United States: The next frontier in US climate mitigation?

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12248
• Published date: 01 July 2018
• Date: 01 July 2018
• Author: Melissa Powers

CASE NOTE

Juliana v United States: The next frontier in US climate

mitigation?

Melissa Powers

Correspondence

Email: powers@lclark.edu In the ground-breaking lawsuit, Juliana v United States, more than 20 children and

young adults are suing agencies of the United States for contributing to climate

change by promoting, supporting and permitting fossil fuel extraction, transportation

and use. The case reached an important threshold in November 2016 when, one

day after a minority of voters elected Donald Trump President, a district court ruled

that the case could move forward. Specifically, the district court ruled that the plain-

tiffs had raised viable legal claims when they alleged the US government had vio-

lated plaintiffs’fundamental constitutional rights to a liveable planet and that the

government had failed to adequately protect public trust resources from harm

caused by climate change. This preliminary ruling has paved the way for a trial in

which plaintiffs will be able to present scientific and factual evidence regarding cli-

mate change and the government’s actions supporting activities that contribute to

climate change. If the plaintiffs ultimately succeed in the case, the Juliana litigation

could ultimately serve as a tool to compel the US government to develop a strategy

for decarbonizing the US energy system and economy.

1

|

INTRODUCTION

As the second year of the Trump Administration proceeds, it’sd

ej

a

vu all over again when it comes to climate litigation in the United

States. During the years of the George W. Bush Presidency, faced

with a federal government that was actively working to undermine

international climate treaties and avoid federal regulation, climate

activists turned to the common law to try to force large greenhouse

gas emitters and recalcitrant regulators to address climate change

and reduce emissions.

1

Under the Obama Administration, the focus

on common law remedies diminished, both because courts fre-

quently dismissed common law suits and because the Obama Admin-

istration pursued an array of strategies to regulate greenhouse gases

and address climate change.

2

Since taking office in January 2017,

the Trump Administration has worked steadily to undermine US

efforts to address climate change.

3

Over objections from his own

Secretary of State, Donald Trump asserted that he would withdraw

the United States from the Paris Agreement and withhold funding to

aid other countries to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

4

Offi-

cials in the Trump Administration have launched a sustained assault

on US laws and policies aimed at addressing climate change and

transitioning away from fossil fuels.

5

Although the Trump Adminis-

tration has faced fierce resistance from environmental organizations,

state and local governments, and even some employees within fed-

eral agencies,

6

it appears likely that national climate change

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

©2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.

1

RH Weaver and DA Kysar, ‘Courting Disaster: Climate Change and the Adjudication of

Catastrophe’(2017) 93 Notre Dame Law Review 295, 322, fn 183.

2

M Dellinger, ‘See You in Court: Around the World in Eight Climate Change Lawsuits’

(2018) 42 William & Mary Law and Policy Review 525, 532–533.

3

See M Mehling and A Vihma, ‘Mourning’for America: Donald Trump’s Climate Change Policy

(Finnish Institute of International Affairs 2018) 11–15.

4

ibid 10; see also The White House, ‘President Trump Announces U.S. Withdrawal from the

Paris Climate Accord’(1 June 2017) <https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2017/06/01/presi

dent-donald-j-trump-announces-us-withdrawal-paris-climate-accord>.

5

Mehling and Vihma (n 3) 11–15; CJ Miller, ‘For a Lump of Coal & a Drop of Oil: An Envir-

onmentalist’s Critique of the Trump Administration’s First Year of Energy Policies’(2018)

36 Virginia Environmental Law Journal 185.

6

See J Achenbach, B Guarino and S Kaplan, ‘Why People are Marching for Science: “There

is No Planet B”’ (Washington Post, 22 April 2017).

DOI: 10.1111/reel.12248

RECIEL. 2018;27:199–204. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/reel

|

199