A Montana judge has ruled in favor of young activists who argued that a state act harmed them and the environment by promoting the use of fossil fuels.
The decision marks the first ruling across the United States as the judge on Monday agreed with the youths who argued that the state violated their right to a "clean and healthful environment."
Montana Judge Rules in Favor of Youth Climate Activists
In the ruling, the court determined that a provision found in the Montana Environmental Policy Act has harmed the state's environment and the young plaintiffs by preventing the state from considering the effects on the climate of various energy projects in the region. The court also said that the provision is accordingly unconstitutional.
In a statement, Julia Olson, the executive director of Our Children's Trust, which was the one that brought the case to the court, said that the ruling was a major win for Montana, for youth, for democracy, and for the climate, as per the Washington Post.
The ruling marks a major victory for the plaintiffs in the case and is considered one of the strongest decisions relating to climate change to have ever been issued by a court in the nation. It could also result in a boost to the environmental movement within the United States. Experts say it may also bring a wave of new cases that seek to advance action on climate change.
The court's ruling, which also invalidates a provision that is blocking climate considerations, marks a rare victory for climate activists who have long been looking to courts to make an effort to push back against government policies and industrial activities that are destroying the planet.
In this particular case, the situation involved 16 young Montana residents, who range in age from five to 22 years, being the ones who brought the United States' first Constitutional and first youth-led climate lawsuit to go to trial.
The court's decision also comes amid a summer of record heat and deadly wildfires, which many believe are the result of conditions brought by climate change. According to the New York Times, it represents a victory in the fight against government support for oil, gas, and coal and the burning of these, which have contributed to the planet getting warmer.
Read Also : Hawaii Wildfire's Death Toll is Expected to Rise
Fighting Against Climate Change
In a statement, Olson added that fires raging in the West were fueled by fossil fuel pollution. She called the recent ruling a game-changer that marks a turning point in the current generation's continued fight to save the planet from the destructive effects of human-caused climate chaos.
The court's ruling means that the state, a major coal and gas-producing region, must now consider climate change whenever there is a decision on whether or not to approve or renew fossil fuel projects.
On the other hand, Emily Flower, a spokeswoman for Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen, said that the recent ruling is "absurd." She argued that it was not surprising that it was made by a judge who let the plaintiffs' attorneys put on a weeklong taxpayer-funded publicity stunt when it was supposed to be a trial.
She argued that Montanans could not be blamed for changing the climate, arguing that the plaintiff's legal theory has been thrown out of federal court and courts in more than a dozen other states, said the Associated Press.
Related Article: Biden's Climate Law Debated by Republicans, Democrats
