Youth Activists In Montana Who Won Historic Climate Case File Fresh Legal Action Against Their State Government
Young Montanans who won a landmark constitutional climate change lawsuit against their state government are headed back to court, seeking to enforce the judgment recognizing their right to a healthy environment and stable climate and to strike down newly enacted state laws that they say infringe upon this right.
Lawyers representing 13 of the original 16 plaintiffs in the case Held v. State of Montana filed a petition for original jurisdiction with the Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday. The petition challenges several statutes passed by the Republican-controlled legislature earlier this year that critics argue restrict or weaken the state’s environmental laws and defy state officials’ constitutional obligation to preserve and maintain a clean and healthful environment. Youth petitioners are asking the court to declare these statutes unconstitutional and to overturn them.
The new legal action comes a year after the state supreme court upheld the youth plaintiffs’ historic victory in the Held case, affirming the trial court’s decision that the state had violated the Montana constitution in passing a law that prohibited regulators from considering greenhouse gas emissions or climate impacts under the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), which requires environmental assessments of projects like coal mine expansions or other fossil fuel development. The trial court ruled in 2023 that such a law effectively blinded regulators to the climate impacts of fossil fuel projects, and therefore would worsen the climate change injuries to youth plaintiffs. The state appealed, and in December 2024 the Montana Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s judgment, including the recognition that the right to a clean and healthy environment under the Montana constitution includes a stable climate system.
In response to the youth plaintiffs’ court win and defeat of the so-called MEPA Limitation law, the state went ahead and enacted new laws that once again impose restrictions on the Montana Environmental Policy Act. The lawmakers’ intention, the youth and their lawyers say, is to again shield fossil fuel projects from scrutiny over their climate impacts.
“Such restrictions on the scope of environmental reviews under MEPA require agencies to turn a blind eye to known environmental harms caused by fossil fuel projects and GHG emissions permitted by [the Department of Environmental Quality],” the petition argues. In addition to limiting the scope of a project’s expected emissions in environmental reviews, preventing regulators from analyzing upstream and downstream emissions, another new amendment to MEPA prohibits the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) from denying or conditioning permits based on these reviews.
State lawmakers and Montana’s Republican governor Greg Gianforte said these reforms, which Gianforte signed into law in May, were needed to reduce red tape and help provide certainty to the state’s energy sector.
“In the Held v. Montana case, they tried to twist MEPA into something it was never meant to be – a tool to deny permits and block development,” House Speaker Brandon Ler said in a press release announcing the enactment of the legislation. “With the signing of this MEPA reform package, we’re making it clear that Montana’s environmental policy is about informed decision making, and not weaponizing and litigation,” he added.
But the new case, dubbed Held v. Montana II, argues that the reforms do the opposite of allowing for informed decision making.
“They re-blindfold state agencies during MEPA reviews of fossil fuel projects, which Held found to be unconstitutional,” the petition asserts.
The case also challenges a newly enacted law that prevents the state from adopting air quality standards, including controls on greenhouse gas emissions, that are stricter than federal ones. This update to Montana’s Clean Air Act, the petition argues, effectively hamstrings DEQ’s ability to assess and regulate greenhouse gas emissions in the state.
Youth petitioners and their lawyers say the challenged laws run contrary to Montana’s constitutional guarantee of the right to a healthy environment and to court decisions affirming this right.
“The Montana Supreme Court has already affirmed that we have a constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment, including a stable climate system, and the facts show we are being harmed right now, yet the state just passed new laws that make these harms worse,” lead petitioner Rikki Held said in a statement.
Nate Bellinger, lead attorney for the youth, said the state’s leaders are “openly defying the Constitution and the Supreme Court.”
“Lawmakers passed laws with the explicit intent to undermine the Court’s ruling,” he said. “The plaintiffs are asking the Supreme Court to enforce its prior judgment and restore agencies’ ability to consider and regulate greenhouse gas pollution before more irreversible harm is done.”
The Office of Governor Gianforte did not respond to a request for comment. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality declined a request for comment due to ongoing litigation.
“We are breathing polluted air, losing access to the lands and waters that sustain us, and confronting heat, wildfires, and climate impacts that endanger our health, our lives, and our futures,” Held added. “We are returning to the Supreme Court to enforce our prior win and because the state has a constitutional duty to protect us now.”
