Page 16 - Julia Olson News Today

'Montana’s emissions and climate change have been proven to be a substantial factor in causing climate impacts to Montana’s environment.'

The ruling could set a groundbreaking precedent in answering the question: Does the government need to protect its citizens from climate change?

Known as Held v. State of Montana, the case was initiated by 16 plaintiffs aged 5 to 22 and has drawn attention due to its potential to set a precedent - Click the link for more details.

A state judge delivered a huge win to young climate plaintiffs. Montana is one of just three states that have the affirmative right to a healthful environment. Montana’s attorney general called the ruling absurd and said the state would appeal the decision.

A Montana judge ruled in favor of climate activists stating that the state was violating their constitutional rights by failing to consider climate change when approving fossil fuel projects.

The pro-environmental ruling was made possible largely because of a bit of unique wording in Montana’s state constitution.

Apparently, planet-warming fossil fuels take priority over Montanans’ constitutionally protected right to a “clean and healthful environment.”

A Montana judge handed a significant victory on Monday to more than a dozen young plaintiffs in the nation’s first constitutional climate trial, as extreme weather becomes more deadly and scientists warn the climate crisis is eroding our environment and natural resources.

In a first-of-its-kind trial, the young environmental activists said state agencies were violating their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment.

The ruling adds to a small number of legal decisions around the world that have established a government duty to protect citizens from climate change