Youth vs. gov in 2023
Like fiction, the law is also created and upheld through narrative. Whose narratives of reality are in contest? Whose will prevail? Who gets a voice? Who’s making those judgments and why?
The answers to these questions will determine the real-life futures of young people. That is why I’ve been so intrigued by the young plaintiffs taking governments to court wherever they can, using the laws that exist, all with a singular purpose—to force governments to take action to limit the damaging effects of fossil fuel emissions.
YOUTH v GOV is the story in documentary form of the Juliana v. The United States of America constitutional lawsuit and the 21 American youth who are taking on the world’s most powerful government. They hail from 10 states: Florida, Alaska, Hawaii, Colorado, Oregon, Washington, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Louisiana, and New York. They are African-American, Indigenous, white, bi-racial, and LGBTQ. Their diversity speaks not only to the impacts of climate change, but to the inclusion required if we are to build a better and more just future together. Since 2015, the legal non-profit Our Children’s Trust, has been representing these young people in their landmark case against the U.S. government for violating their constitutional rights to life, liberty, personal safety, and property through their willful actions in creating the climate crisis they will inherit.
La Rose v. Her Majesty the Queen, the Canadian lawsuit, was dismissed in 2020. As far as I can tell, an appeal is in progress. The planet is burning up a lot faster than the wheels of the law will ever turn. That case continues, now La Rose v. His Majesty the King. In February, the youth plaintiffs presented their arguments before a panel of Federal Court of Appeal judges in a two-day virtual hearing. They and their attorneys are now awaiting a ruling from the court.
In India, a government body, the National Green Tribunal issued a two-page order dismissing the youth case against the government of India. More than that, the government has targeted the young plaintiffs, and politicians have suggested that voicing environmental concerns or critiquing mainstream energy choices and development trajectories is detrimental to the nation. It’s a counter-narrative, as is the narrative of the oil companies that now engage in greenwashing.
Held v. Montana is now making its way through the system. Here’s an excerpt from the NYT article about the case:
No matter who prevails, the case is likely to be appealed to the state Supreme Court. And even if the young Montanans win on appeal, they are not expecting immediate changes.
Rather, the plaintiffs are seeking “declaratory relief.” That is, they want the judge to acknowledge that fossil fuels are causing pollution and warming the planet and declare the state’s support for the industry unconstitutional.
History will judge the young people in these cases, as it will judge those adults who recognize the validity and the legal implications of their positions. It will judge those who give them a fair hearing, as well as those who treat them with derision. The narratives of these cases will change over time. The young people concerned will likely live to frame those new narratives after the grownups involved are gone.
