MONTANA — A Judge in Montana sided with a group of environmental activists who argued that state agencies are violating their constitutional right to a clean environment by not weighing the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions when evaluating requests for fossil fuel permits.
The plaintiffs, ranging in age from five years old to 22 years old, argue that state agencies are violating the Montana Constitution which guaranteed citizens the right to a “clean and healthful environment” by prioritizing the extraction of fossil fuels and not weighing the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions when issuing permits.
District Court Judge Kathy Seeley found the state’s fossil fuel permit policy unconstitutional and rejected the state’s argument that greenhouse gas emissions are insignificant compared to other states and countries.
According to reporting by the Associated Press, Judge Seeley wrote in her decision that, “every additional ton of GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions exacerbates plaintiffs’ injuries and risks locking in irreversible climate injuries.”
Seeley also noted that renewable power is “technically feasible and economically beneficial,” citing testimony from the trial that said Montana could replace 80% of existing fossil fuel energy by 2030.
Emily Flower, spokesperson for Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, decried the ruling as “absurd” and said the office planned to appeal. She criticized Seeley for allowing the plaintiffs to put on what Flower called a “taxpayer-funded publicity stunt.”
As things stand now, The Montana legislature will have to find a way to bring the state’s policies into compliance with the state’s constitution.
This is the first time a court in the U.S. has sided with citizens on constitutional rights related to climate change.
