Experts throw support behind newest Juliana push
E&E News | Jennifer Hijazi Law professors, environmental advocates and public health experts said yesterday that a federal appeals court got it wrong when it dismissed the so-called kids’ climate case. While the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals strongly acknowledged the gravity of climate change in its Juliana v. United States opinion, it “reluctantly” dismissed the landmark case on the basis that the solution sits with the legislative and executive branches, rather than with the courts. Two of the three judges on the 9th Circuit panel concluded that they would not be able to provide relief for the young challengers, who raised claims against the federal government for contributing to climate change. Legal academics this week said the court got it wrong. “Doubting its own authority, the majority improperly conflates separation of powers with standing,” professors from more than 20 law schools wrote in a friend-of-the-court brief supporting a rehearing of the case. They noted that the 9th Circuit majority was correct in finding that it can’t “design or implement” a remedial plan beyond the scope of its constitutional powers, but they added that “the youth plaintiffs have not asked the district court to make or implement a plan or do anything otherwise committed to an elected branch of government.” All the kids seek, according to the professors, is the court’s acknowledgment of constitutional wrongdoing and “reasoned judgment to dispense a remedy” for the government to implement. The violation of individual rights should also trump concerns about what issues courts can decide, the professors added. “Balancing individual liberties against governmental interests, as due process analysis requires courts to do, is a task presumptively appropriate for federal courts,” their brief said. In a separate filing, public health experts reiterated that universally acknowledged climate change effects will disproportionately affect young people
