In particular, the court held that a recent Montana law "prohibiting analysis of GHG emissions and corresponding impacts to the climate, as well as how additional GHG emissions will contribute to climate change or be consistent with the Montana Constitution . violates Youth Plaintiffs' right to a clean and healthful environment and is unconstitutional on its face." Further, the principle that a state government's inaction on climate change violates the constitutional rights of its citizens is not only momentous, but offers powerful support for the broader environmental movement. The court's ruling is grounded specifically in the Montana state constitution, which incorporates more far-reaching environmental rights than most--indeed, the Montana Constitution expressly states that "all persons . In particular, this Court's ruling has demonstrated the feasibility of an alternative route to hold governments accountable for climate change, and how to compel certain government action to alleviate the burdens of climate change.

Source: New York Times August 15, 2023 20:17 UTC