This article discusses the recent dismissal of two high-profile climate lawsuits filed against the federal government by Our Children’s Trust (OCT), a non-profit climate advocacy group. The lawsuits, Juliana vs. United States and Genesis B. vs. Environmental Protection Agency, alleged constitutional violations and discriminatory harm against children due to climate change. The article argues that while the lawsuits reflect a frustration with traditional climate law, their demands are unrealistic and anti-democratic. The author also highlights the large number of climate lawsuits in the US and the support they receive from environmental organizations. They question the future of climate law and its alignment with scientific and legal principles.
| Signal | Change | 10y horizon | Driving force |
|---|---|---|---|
| Climate lawsuits dismissed by US District Courts | From relying on litigation for climate action | More focus on other forms of climate action | Frustration with government inaction on climate change |
| Lawsuits demand immediate government action on climate | From regulation to a ban on fossil fuel emissions | Potential Supreme Court ruling against lawsuit | Belief in the urgency and severity of climate change |
| Environmental movement supports climate lawsuits | From reliance on other forms of climate activism | Potential setback in legal strategy and goals | Belief that climate change justifies drastic action |
| Over 1200 climate lawsuits in the US | From lack of legal action on climate change | Potential increase in liability and regulations | Desire to hold the fossil fuel industry accountable |
| Environmental organizations view US energy policy as unconstitutional | From acceptance of current policy framework | Potential disruption to energy policy | Belief that current policy is insufficient to address climate change |