The Supreme Court announced on Monday that it would not hear an appeal in the climate case Juliana v. United States, effectively concluding a ten-year legal battle initiated by 21 young plaintiffs against the federal government. The lawsuit argued that governmental policies promoting fossil fuel use infringed on constitutional rights. The Ninth Circuit Court ruled in 2020 that climate change issues were not appropriate for judicial resolution, necessitating political action instead. Despite the dismissal, the case has served as a strong model for other successful climate litigation, highlighting an evolving approach towards addressing climate-related grievances in courts.
The Supreme Court's refusal to hear the appeal in Juliana v. United States means the case, a landmark climate lawsuit, has officially concluded its decade-long legal journey.
The Ninth Circuit's ruling emphasized that addressing climate change is a political matter, not one suited for judicial intervention, thereby shifting responsibility back to government institutions.
While the Juliana case was dismissed, its framework has inspired other climate lawsuits that have achieved some success, indicating a evolving legal landscape for environmental issues.
Concerns about the Supreme Court's conservative majority influenced the decision not to pursue the appeal further, as there was a fear it might undermine existing environmental protections.
Collection
[
|
...
]