A landmark trial against the state of Montana will move forward, with proceedings set to begin on Feb. 6, 2023, the Western Environmental Law Center announced on Monday. Sixteen youth plaintiffs signed onto the Held vs. State of Montana lawsuit, which charges that Montana has violated their constitutional right to “a healthful environment.” The most recent version of the Montana constitution states that this extends to present and future generations, and that the state ensures it will “attain the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without degradation, risk to health or safety, or other undesirable and unintended consequences.” At issue is Montana’s use of fossil fuels and other polluting practices that are causing not just environmental harm, but harm to residents like the plaintiffs, who range in age from three to 20.

The complaint was initially filed in 2020, but was only partially dismissed last August, ironically around the time wildfires had ramped up significantly, with the amount of acreage burning doubling in mere weeks’ time. Plaintiffs like Rikki Held claim some of those wildfires have negatively impacted their health. Held told NBC News that she experienced heat exhaustion and suffered headaches from the fires while working on her family’s ranch. Held and her fellow plaintiffs were allowed to move forward with a handful of claims against the state that include allegations that Montana’s fossil fuel consumption wreaks havoc on public trust resources that its constitution explicitly protects.

According to Nate Bellinger, an attorney with Our Children’s Trust who’s serving as co-counsel alongside the Western Environmental Law Center, “this trial is an unprecedented opportunity to present a fully developed factual record before the judiciary establishing how the state of Montana’s ongoing actions to promote fossil fuels are causing and contributing to climate change.”

“Through this trial, we will have a chance to prove that Montana’s actions promoting a fossil fuel energy system are violating the fundamental constitutional rights,” Bellinger said.

    <a></a>
  
  
    <a href="#update-1644357033000">
            Tuesday, Feb 8, 2022 ·  9:50:33 PM +00:00

      ·
      April Siese
    </a>

    I had a chance to speak to one of the plaintiffs in this case, Grace Gibson-Snyder, who spent several years involved in climate activism before joining the <em>Held vs. State of Montana</em> lawsuit. Gibson-Snyder has volunteered with and worked on behalf of <a href="https://www.homeresource.org/">Home ReSource</a> and <a href="https://livableclimate.org/">Families for a Livable Climate</a>. “I’m all for grassroots change,” Gibson-Snyder admits, “but also when we’re on a timeline larger change is important.”

She’s excited to continue her involvement with the case as well as providing public engagement for those who may not realize that this case impacts the entire state at the least. “The constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment that we have in Montana obviously applies to all its citizens and the actions the government continues to take regarding use of fossil fuels… is not beneficial in any way to the environment that we so treasure in Montana,” Gibson-Snyder says.

In Gibson-Snyder’s lifetime, she fears the glaciers that Glacier National Park is known for will disappear. She’s also already felt the negative effects of a rapidly changing climate, having to contend with worsened air quality during wildfire seasons and the worry that her uncle who battles those fires will continue to face more dangerous conditions. As much as the case excites her, a future where Montana and the rest of the world does little to address the climate crisis worries her.

“[It’s a] really heavy heart that I have because I know people in the future, my children’s generation, won’t get to experience the natural world in the same way as my parents or even I have had,” Gibson-Snyder explains. “I want to have children, I want to… but I struggle with if it’s ethical to do so when, best-case scenario, they suffer from the same dread and emotional challenges I have [had] watching climate change really start to impact the world; worst-case scenario my children can suffer directly from drought, famine, and border conflicts.”

Montana is one of just six states that has codified environmental rights in its constitution, though there are a handful of other states whose constitutions at least mention protections but lack more stringent rules. Though the state is somewhat considered a leader in renewables used for power, with 45% of its grid operating off of them, Montana nonetheless emits 30.7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year and is still reliant on coal and gas. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, coal has only recently jumped from providing Montana with the largest share of its electricity generation in 2019 to being overtaken by hydropower by the end of 2020. While. it’s certainly a start, coal still accounts for enough of a portion of Montana’s energy to place in sixth among all U.S. states in output. Lawyers for the plaintiffs are hoping a positive ruling further puts an end to coal production in the state and that the case can influence policies across the U.S. and the entire world. Regardless of outcome, a ruling in Held vs. The State of Montana would be historic by default.

No youth-led lawsuit like this has gone to trial in the U.S. and there is sadly little precedent for this kind of climate change-focused litigation. The 2015 lawsuit Juliana vs. United States filed in Oregon has yet to have trial dates set but includes 21 youth plaintiffs ranging in age from 13 to 25. The complaint was filed by Our Children’s Trust and offers similar arguments seen in Held vs. State of Montana, including that the government’s use of fossil fuels threaten the present generation as well as generations to come, thereby infringing on constitutional rights. In Juliana vs. United States’ case, it’s the U.S. constitutional right of life, liberty, and property. According to Our Children’s Trust, “the youth plaintiffs are awaiting a ruling on their Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint and the Motion to Intervene filed by 18 states, led by Alabama.” Unsurprisingly, the states not willing to face accountability for their actions include some of the worst polluters, like Texas, West Virginia, and North Dakota. In both cases, regardless of challenges, lawyers are undeterred and look forward to a greener future.

”By allowing this case to proceed to trial, the court has indicated that it will not give the political branches unfettered discretion to promote a fossil fuel-based energy system if doing so is causing harm to Montana’s children and violating their constitutional rights,” Bellinger said. “A successful outcome in this case would set an important legal precedent, not just for Montana, but for other states and countries where youth are working to hold their governments accountable for protecting their fundamental rights from the ongoing climate crisis.”