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
montana
'Monumental Win': Montana Supreme Court Upholds Decision on Youth Climate Case
The court, said one attorney, "has affirmed the constitutional rights of youth to a safe and livable climate, confirming that the future of our children cannot be sacrificed for fossil fuel interests."
Dec 18, 2024
Youth plaintiffs celebrated on Wednesday after the Montana Supreme Court upheld a judge's August 2023 decision that the state government's promotion of climate-wrecking fossil fuels violates the young residents' state constitutional rights.
"This ruling is a victory not just for us, but for every young person whose future is threatened by climate change," said Rikki Held, the named plaintiff for Held v. State of Montana, in a statement. "We have been heard, and today the Montana Supreme Court has affirmed that our rights to a safe and healthy climate cannot be ignored."
Highlighting that "this will forever be in the court record, despite any continued rhetoric of denial coming from people in power in the state," Grace, another plaintiff, said, "I am thrilled that the Montana Supreme Court has sided with Montana citizens to protect the people and the places we love."
Another plaintiff, Olivia, welcomed the ruling as "a monumental win" and "a call to action for all Montanans."
Plaintiff Georgi similarly asserted that "this is a time for Montana to embrace the future—clean energy offers economic benefits and new jobs," and added that "we look forward to working with the state to implement this transition and ensure that Montana leads the way in tackling the climate crisis."
Plaintiff Kian pointed to other ongoing cases across the globe, declaring that "this ruling is not just a win for Montana—it's a signal to the world that youth-led climate action is powerful and effective."
"We hope this decision inspires others across the country and beyond to stand up for their rights to a livable climate," Kian continued. Just as the youth plaintiffs in Navahine v. Hawaii Department of Transportation secured historic climate justice through a settlement this past June, the eyes of the world are now on us, seeing how youth-driven legal action can create real change."
In Montana, the state government appealed District Court Judge Kathy Seeley's historic ruling in favor of the 16 young plaintiffs to the state's highest court, which heard arguments in July. Wednesday's 6-1 decision—only Justice Jim Rice dissented—is the first of its kind for a state supreme court.
The majority's 70-page opinion discusses the drafters of the Montana Constitution, which says in part that "the state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations," and "the Legislature shall provide for the administration and enforcement of this duty."
Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote that the court's majority rejects "the argument that the delegates—intending the strongest, all-encompassing environmental protections in the nation, both anticipatory and preventative, for present and future generations—would grant the state a free pass to pollute the Montana environment just because the rest of the world insisted on doing so."
"The district court's conclusion of law is affirmed: Montana's right to a clean and healthful environment and environmental life support system includes a stable climate system, which is clearly within the object and true principles of the framers' inclusion of the right to a clean and healthful environment," the chief justice added.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs joined the young Montanans in applauding the opinion. Nate Bellinger of Our Children's Trust said that "this is a monumental moment for Montana, our youth, and the future of our planet."
"Today, the Montana Supreme Court has affirmed the constitutional rights of youth to a safe and livable climate, confirming that the future of our children cannot be sacrificed for fossil fuel interests," he added. "This is a victory for young people and for generations to come. The court said loud and clear: Montana's Constitution does not grant the state a free pass to ignore climate change because others fail to act—this landmark decision underscores the state's affirmative duty to lead by example."
Melissa Hornbein, senior attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center, noted that "the Montana Supreme Court's decision compels the state to carefully assess the greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts of all future fossil fuel permits."
"Specifically, Montana's regulatory agencies must now evaluate the potential harm to the environment and the health and safety of the state's children from any new fossil fuel projects, and determine whether the project can be justified in light of the ongoing unconstitutional degradation of Montana's environment, natural resources, and climate," she explained. "This ruling clarifies that the constitution sets a clear directive for Montana to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions, which are among the highest in the nation on a per capita basis, and to transition to a clean, renewable energy future."
Whether the state government will comply with the decision remains to be seen. In a statement to The Hill, a spokesperson for Republican Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen's office called the ruling "disappointing, but not surprising" and claimed that the court majority "yet again ruled in favor of their ideologically aligned allies and ignored the fact that Montana has no power to impact the climate."
Separately, Knudsen on Tuesday filed his 59th lawsuit against the Biden administration, challenging its plan to halt federal coal production in the Powder River Basin, which the attorney general said would "effectively kill Montana's coal industry."
Keep ReadingShow Less
All But 3 State Attorneys General Call for Peaceful Transfer of Power, Condemn Political Violence
The three Republicans who didn't join the statement "presumably want violence," said one critic.
Nov 05, 2024
A bipartisan group of attorneys general on Monday led the vast majority of the United States' top state-level legal officials in releasing a statement calling for a peaceful transfer of power regardless of the presidential election results—but three Republican attorneys general were conspicuously absent from the list of signatories.
Ken Paxton of Texas, Todd Rokita of Indiana, and Austin Knudsen of Montana did not add their names to the statement, which condemned "any acts of violence related to the results."
"A peaceful transfer of power is the highest testament to the rule of law, a tradition that stands at the heart of our nation's stability," said the officials. "As attorneys general, we affirm our commitment to protect our communities and uphold the democratic principles we serve."
The statement was released a day after Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said at a rally that he wouldn't mind journalists getting shot and that he "shouldn't have left" the White House after he was voted out of office in 2020.
Trump urged thousands of his supporters to descend on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 to try to stop Congress from certifying President Joe Biden's electoral victory, and has continued to claim he was the true winner of the 2020 election.
Election experts have said in recent weeks that Trump has been setting the stage for the same baseless claims of election fraud and vote-stealing that he and his allies spread in 2020—telling supporters that Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris will only win the election if Democrats cheat and saying, along with his running mate, Sen. JD Vance (R-Ohio), that he will only accept the election results if he views them as "fair and legal."
The attorneys general—representing 48 states, the District of Colombia, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands—called on Americans "to vote, participate in civil discourse, and, above all, respect the integrity of the democratic process."
"Let us come together after this election not divided by outcomes but united in our shared commitment to the rule of law and safety of all Americans," they said. "Violence has no place in the democratic process; we will exercise our authority to enforce the law against any illegal acts that threaten it."
The statement was spearheaded by two Democrats—Ellen Rosenblum of Oregon and William Tong of Connecticut—and two Republicans, Dave Yost of Ohio and Kris Kobach of Kansas. Kobach notably led a so-called Election Integrity Commission during Trump's term in the White House, searching unsuccessfully for evidence that the Republican was the true winner of the national popular vote in 2016.
Of the attorneys general who did not join the statement, Rokita and Knudsen are up for reelection on Tuesday.
Indiana-based author Steve Tally said Rokita, Knudsen, and Paxton "presumably want violence" and urged voters to oppose the state attorneys general.
"Where is the Indiana secretary of state and attorney general on this one?" said Destiny Wells, the Democratic candidate challenging Rokita. "Oh that's right, it's their team."
In Texas, Paxton has been a vehement supporter of Trump, announcing Monday he would deploy an "Election Day Rapid Response Legal Team" to polling places and suing the Biden-Harris administration over plans to send federal election monitors to Texas.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Montanans Launch Push to Get Abortion Rights on November Ballot
"With 2024 shaping up to be the biggest year ever for abortion on the ballot, it is critical that Montanans can make their voices heard on this issue."
Apr 17, 2024
As abortion continues to dominate this year's state and federal political contests, Montanans Securing Reproductive Rights on Tuesday launched a signature collection drive to get a citizen-initiated state constitutional amendment on the November ballot.
Since the right-wing U.S. Supreme Court reversedRoe v. Wade with Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization nearly two years ago, Republican state lawmakers have ramped up efforts to further restrict abortion care—and voters, including residents of red states, have responded by protecting reproductive freedom when weighing in on related ballot measures.
With little hope that the divided Congress will restore nationwide abortion rights, ballot initiatives for the 2024 cycle are ongoing in various states, from Arizona and Florida to Montana, where "a yes vote on Ballot Issue #14 will keep the government out of our personal lives," as the Montanans Securing Reproductive Rights website states.
"This is an exciting opportunity to secure our rights for generations to come. Now is the time to ensure power remains in the hands of the people of Montana, so everyone has the freedom to prevent, continue, or end a pregnancy should they choose," the site adds. "Politicians have no business controlling our bodies and our futures."
After a legal battle with Republican state Attorney General Austin Knudsen, the ballot language is:
CI-128 would amend the Montana Constitution to expressly provide a right to make and carry out decisions about one's own pregnancy, including the right to abortion. It would prohibit the government from denying or burdening the right to abortion before fetal viability. It would also prohibit the government from denying or burdening access to an abortion when a treating healthcare professional determines it is medically indicated to protect the pregnant patient's life or health. CI-128 prevents the government from penalizing patients, healthcare providers, or anyone who assists someone in exercising their right to make and carry out voluntary decisions about their pregnancy.
Montana currently allows abortion care up until fetal viability. In response to a legal challenge from Planned Parenthood of Montana (PPMT), a trial judge in February struck down three laws passed by the Republican-controlled state Legislature in 2021: a 20-week ban, restrictions on medication abortions, and a rule that providers must offer patients an ultrasound.
"We are relieved that Montanans will no longer live with the threat of these harmful restrictions taking effect. But make no mistake, our fight continues," PPMT president and CEO Martha Fuller said at the time. "For years anti-abortion politicians at all levels of government have made banning abortion their number one priority, despite the current protection held in our state constitution."
"During the 2023 Montana legislative session, an onslaught of anti-abortion bills was introduced, passed, and signed into law, and PPMT is working hard to beat back these attacks and more," Fuller continued. "We will never stop working to ensure that all Montanans and those who are forced to travel here for care can access the care they need."
In addition to Planned Parenthood, Montanans Securing Reproductive Rights is a campaign by the ACLU of Montana, the Fairness Project, and Forward Montana. The coalition now needs to collect 60,000 signatures by June 21.
"Anti-abortion extremists have tried to interfere in Montanans' personal healthcare choices again and again. That's totally unacceptable—Montanans deserve to make their own decisions about reproductive care, not have politicians decide for them," the Fairness Project executive director Kelly Hall said Tuesday.
"The Fairness Project is proud and excited to be supporting Montanans Securing Reproductive Rights in their campaign to pass CI-128, especially at a time when abortion rights are under attack," Hall added. "With 2024 shaping up to be the biggest year ever for abortion on the ballot, it is critical that Montanans can make their voices heard on this issue."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular