SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
environmental protection agency
Despite Catastrophic Fires, Federal Court in California Dismisses Youth Climate Case
"Wildfires are ravaging these children's communities in California, but the court claims that their suffering is too 'indirect' to matter," said the plaintiffs' lawyer. "This ruling is nothing short of judicial dereliction."
Feb 11, 2025
With Californians still reeling from what is expected to be "the costliest wildfire disaster in American history," a federal judge in the state on Tuesday dismissed a constitutional climate case that young people brought against the U.S. government.
The firm Our Children's Trust filed the equal protection lawsuit on behalf of 18 children in the Central District of California on December 10, 2023. Genesis B. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency initially just targeted the EPA and its administrator, but the plaintiffs later added the Office of Management and Budget and its director as defendants.
Since the beginning of the case, the Biden administration fought for its dismissal. U.S. District Judge Michael Fitzgerald, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, previously dismissed the case last May but also allowed the youth plaintiffs' lawyers to amend their complaint. The judge dismissed the case again on Tuesday, the first major development since Republican President Donald Trump—a noted enemy of climate action—returned to the White House last month.
"We are fighting not just for ourselves, but for every young person who deserves a world where their lives, their health, and their future matter."
Responding in a Tuesday statement, Our Children's Trust slammed the "extraordinary decision to dismiss the case by disregarding key evidence showing the harmful effects of the EPA's policies and the unique vulnerability of children's bodies to climate pollution," highlighting expert testimony from economist Joseph Stiglitz and Dr. Elizabeth Pinsky, a psychiatrist and pediatrician.
"By dismissing this case, the court is turning a blind eye to the real-world harms youth are enduring right now. Wildfires are ravaging these children's communities in California, but the court claims that their suffering is too 'indirect' to matter," said Julia Olson, chief legal counsel for the plaintiffs.
"This ruling is nothing short of judicial dereliction in the face of a climate emergency," she asserted. "The court refused to consider that the government's devaluation of children isn't just bad policy—it's a violation of fundamental equal rights."
The young plaintiffs also expressed disappointment with Fitzgerald's decision in the wake of January blazes that experts tied to the climate emergency—specifically, the World Weather Attribution found that fossil fuel-driven global warming made the weather conditions that caused the Los Angeles County fires 35% more probable.
"The court's decision to dismiss this case before we could even present our evidence is a gut punch," lead plaintiff Genesis B said Tuesday. "We are living with the consequences of these policies every single day—wildfires, choking smoke, evacuation orders. And now, with the strongest storm of the year set to hit Southern California this week, our case is more urgent than ever."
"Forecasters are warning of widespread flooding, landslides, and dangerous debris flows, especially in areas devastated by wildfires," Genesis B. explained. "We wanted the chance to show the court the science, the economics, and the lived experiences that prove the government's actions are harming us. Instead, we were denied that opportunity. He just shut the door on us, made up his own facts, and never listened to the real experts. He never gave us the opportunity to testify."
The 18 young plaintiffs are not backing down! They remain committed to fighting for their constitutional rights and will continue to pursue all available legal avenues to hold the U.S. government accountable for its actions. Read the PR: bit.ly/GenesisPR0225 #YouthvGov #GenesisvEPA
[image or embed]
— Our Children’s Trust (@youthvgov.bsky.social) February 11, 2025 at 3:45 PM
Despite the setback in court on Tuesday, the young plaintiffs in this case are determined to keep fighting and are now considering potential next steps with their lawyers.
"We are not backing down. This fight is about refusing to let our lives be discounted, and we won't stand by as our future is treated as expendable," declared plaintiff Maya W. "We are fighting not just for ourselves, but for every young person who deserves a world where their lives, their health, and their future matter."
This case is just one of many that young people have pursued in recent years, some of which are ongoing and many that involve Our Children's Trust. The group said that earlier Tuesday, attorneys representing a dozen youth plaintiffs in the constitutional climate case Layla H. v. Virginia presented their case virtually before the state Supreme Court.
In another Our Children's Trust case, Juliana v. United States, 43 members of Congress last month submitted a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court supporting the 21 plaintiffs. That filing came less than a month after the Montana Supreme Court upheld a 2023 decision that the state government's promotion of fossil fuels violates young residents' state constitutional rights. Earlier last year, Hawaii's governor and Department of Transportation announced an "unprecedented" settlement in another youth climate case.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Constitutional Crisis Intensifies as Lawless Trump Ignores Federal Court Orders
"We are in the midst of a constitutional crisis right now," said one legal expert. "We never have seen anything like this."
Feb 11, 2025
The Trump administration's defiance of court orders that threaten to hamper the president and unelected billionaire Elon Musk's assault on federal agencies and basic rights has legal experts and other observers warning of a perilous new phase in the United States' rolling constitutional crisis.
On Monday, the Revolving Door Project (RDP) launched an effort to track the Trump administration's refusal to comply with orders from the federal judiciary and detail the impact that obstinance is having across the country.
The watchdog group pointed to several specific examples, including the Environmental Protection Agency's refusal to "disperse already-awarded grants funded by the Inflation Reduction Act, in apparent defiance of" federal judges' orders against the Trump administration's sweeping funding freeze.
"NOTHING is more important than civil society pressuring judges to have a spine in the face of Musk and Trump's intransigence," Jeff Hauser, RDP's executive director, wrote on social media late Monday. "Judicial orders must be enforced!"
Journalists Judd Legum and Noel Sims highlighted another example on Tuesday, noting that the administration is "prohibiting National Institutes of Health (NIH) staff from issuing virtually all grant funding" despite two federal court injunctions against the freeze.
David Super, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, told Legum and Sims that the Trump administration is "in contempt of court," calling the continued freeze on NIH grants "completely unlawful."
"The administration cannot choose which law it will follow or ignore. These are not partisan or political issues. These are rule of law and process issues. We cannot afford to remain silent."
Super is among a growing number of legal experts sounding the alarm about the nation's descent into a full-blown constitutional emergency.
"We are in the midst of a constitutional crisis right now," Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional law expert and dean of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, toldThe New York Times late last week. "There have been so many unconstitutional and illegal actions in the first 18 days of the Trump presidency. We never have seen anything like this."
"Systematic unconstitutional and illegal acts create a constitutional crisis," Chemerinsky added.
Both President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance have levied criticism at the federal judiciary in recent days as it has put up roadblocks that have hindered the new administration's ability to lawlessly impose its will.
"Certain activists and highly political judges want us to slow down, or stop," Trump wrote in a social media post early Tuesday, just days after Musk floated allowing "elected bodies" to terminate "the worst 1% of appointed judges."
Federal courts have proven a significant obstacle to the Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency( DOGE), whose efforts to take over critical systems and seize highly sensitive data have sparked high-stakes legal battles.
In a statement on Monday, American Bar Association (ABA) president William Bay noted that "in the last 21 days, more than a dozen lawsuits have been filed alleging that the administration's actions violate the rule of law and are contrary to the Constitution or laws of the United States."
"The administration cannot choose which law it will follow or ignore," said Bay. "These are not partisan or political issues. These are rule of law and process issues. We cannot afford to remain silent. We must stand up for the values we hold dear. The ABA will do its part and act to protect the rule of law."
"We urge every attorney to join us and insist that our government, a government of the people, follow the law," he added. "It is part of the oath we took when we became lawyers. Whatever your political party or your views, change must be made in the right way. Americans expect no less."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'A Disgrace': Trump Admin Targets Multiple Environmental Justice Offices
"Donald Trump has decided that we do not deserve clean air or water, and our right to a livable and safe planet comes second to further enriching his fossil fuel friends and donors," said one environmentalist.
Feb 06, 2025
The Trump administration plans to place over 100 workers who are employed with the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights on administrative leave, according to Wednesday reporting from The Wall Street Journal, which cited unnamed sources.
Other outlets have since reported on the development, including The Washington Post, which wrote Thursday that Trump appointees at the EPA told staff that they plan to close the office.
This move targeting the EPA, one the latest efforts by the Trump administration to drastically reshape federal agencies, was panned by multiple environmental organizations, who accused the White House of turning its back on vulnerable communities.
"The EPA's environmental justice office was created to challenge the historic pattern of pollution disproportionately affecting low-income communities and communities of color," said Chitra Kumar, managing director of the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. Kumar was also formerly an official with the EPA Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights.
"Once again, the Trump administration is sidelining both science and the nation's most overburdened people," she added.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration is also reportedly working to "remake" the Justice Department's Environment and Natural Resources Division, which defends the U.S. government's environmental actions in court and brings cases against individuals who violate federal environmental law. The Washington Post reported that Trump appointees at the Department of Justice said they plan to fire roughly 20 workers at the division, "among other actions that have sent morale there plummeting."
The Office of Environmental Justice within the division has already "been eliminated," and the five people working in that office have already been put on administrative leave, according to the outlet.
And in one of her first acts as U.S. Attorney General, Pam Bondi undid a Biden-era directive ordering the Department of Justice to emphasize enforcement of environmental laws in disadvantaged and low-income communities.
Trump administration attacks on what the White House deems "diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility" (DEIA) initiatives were expected. On his first day in office, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order mandating the end of all federal DEI programs, goals, mandates, and plans. The order also specifically called for the termination, "to the maximum extent allowed by law, all DEI, DEIA, and 'environmental justice' offices and positions."
"By shuttering these offices, Donald Trump has decided that we do not deserve clean air or water, and our right to a livable and safe planet comes second to further enriching his fossil fuel friends and donors," said Sierra Club executive director Ben Jealous in a Thursday statement. "Trump has been on the job for less than a month, but every single day he is making our communities less safe."
Like Kumar at the Union of Concerned Scientists, senior VP of environmental health at the Natural Resources Defense Council Matthew Tejada (also an alum of the EPA's environmental justice office) said that the country's most vulnerable communities would lose out.
"Shuttering the environmental justice office [at the EPA] will mean more toxic contaminants, dangerous air, and unsafe water in communities across the nation that have been most harmed by pollution in the past," said Tejada. "Trump EPA is turning its back on those who need a cleaner environment more than anyone. This is a disgrace."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular