By George Monbiot, The Guardian blog
No longer should our survival be an afterthought. If we are to withstand the climate crisis, every decision should begin with the question of what the planet can endure. This means that any discussion about new infrastructure should begin with ecological constraints. The figures are stark.
By Joel Stronberg, Civil Notion
Twenty years of gridlock have squandered the time that would have been better used for steady—dare I say progressive—enactment of federal policies and programs to effectuate the transition to a just, low-carbon, and sustainable economy.
By Joel Stronberg, Civil Notion
More than four years ago, 21 youthful plaintiffs asked a federal court to rule a habitable environment a protected right under the US Constitution. On January 17, 2020, a divided three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals told them they didn’t have standing to pursue their case and that there was nothing the court could do to redress the legitimate harms they had suffered...
By Joel Stronberg, Civil Notion
On the day Greta Thunberg gave her emotion-filled speech at the United Nation’s (UN) Climate Summit, another historic event involving the Swedish activist and 15 other youthful climate hawks—representing 12 countries--took place. The filing of the first-ever legal complaint about climate change to the UN’s Committee on the Rights of the Child. The communication is titled Sacchi et al. vs. Argentina, et al.
By Rachel Ramirez, Grist
Twenty-two states and seven cities sued the Trump administration on Tuesday over the Environmental Protection Agency’s new plan for power plants. The lawsuit alleges that the so-called Affordable Clean Energy rule would accelerate the impacts of the climate crisis and impose health and safety risks on Americans.
By Joel Stronberg, Civil Notion
Political lobbying in the US that helped block the progress of proposed climate regulation a decade ago led to a social cost of $60 billion, according to a new study.
By Dana Drugmand, DesmogBlog
The 21 youth plaintiffs in Juliana v. United States allege that the government’s role in perpetuating a fossil fuel energy system despite knowledge of the climate consequences amounts to violations of their constitutional rights.
By Valerie Brown, The Revelator
The question remains unanswered: Do we — including future generations — have a legal right to a climate in which we can pursue our rights to life, liberty, property and happiness?
By Mary DeMocker, The Sun
I look at the land as being part of a sacred covenant with our children and the coming generations. If we live for ourselves only, our lives are bereft of true legacy. But when we live in the presence of our ancestors, we also live for our descendants. To feel concern for the future is to bring a piece of eternity into the present and let it guide us.
By Elaine Johnson, The Guardian blog
The chief judge of an Australian court of superior jurisdiction has, for the first time, found that a coalmine ought to be refused for its impact on climate change. And the decision comes just in time.
By Joel Stronberg, Civil Notion
In lay terms, the plaintiffs are pushing back on the government’s continued efforts to prevent the case from going to trial. The Administration’s strategy these days is to go around trial and appellate court rulings by directly seeking relief from an increasingly conservative Supreme Court.
By Joel Stronberg, Civil Notion
The Trump administration has once again filed a motion to dismiss Juliana v. United States before the trial even begins. Although rebuffed for the second time by the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) on November 2, 2018, government attorneys thought to go back to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit with the same hackneyed request to deny the youthful plaintiffs in the case their day in court—hoping for a different outcome.