Analysis: Legal cases taken by young activists are provoking policies that might just do enough to mitigate the climate crisis

By Aoife Daly and Liesl Muller, ERI/UCC

The United States Supreme Court earlier this month declined a petition to revive a case brought by 21 young Americans in the youth-led constitutional climate lawsuit Juliana v. United States. This brings to an end the almost decade-long legal battle of these youth which aimed to force their government to better tackle the climate crisis.

The case was dismissed on a technicality and therefore did not go to a full hearing, so the young people behind the action were never given the opportunity to have their case heard. The Juliana youth are impassioned, diverse young people from all over the US. Together with Our Children's Trust, a nonprofit law firm representing youth who bring climate lawsuits against governments, they have forged huge changes in how children, youth and climate are talked about in the US.

They have inspired other cases which have led to concrete government policy commitments. In a context where CO2 levels are the highest they have been for two million years, these youth have achieved things that many people thought impossible.

From The Years Project, meet the kids behind the Juliana v. United States climate crisis court case

The Juliana plaintiffs alleged that the "nation’s climate system" was critical to their rights to life, liberty, and property. They made an equal protection claim based on the US government’s denial to them of fundamental rights afforded to prior and present generations, under the US’s 'public trust doctrine', the doctrine which states that certain public goods are held in trust by the state.

The Juliana case argued that one of those public goods includes the atmosphere, which is being harmed by carbon emissions – the US is the second biggest emitter of any country in the world. The case faced intense pushback from all three of the most recent administrations, from Trump to Biden via Obama.

In spite of the setback, the impact of the case has been immense. The legal arguments made in Juliana v. United States have inspired more than 60 youth-led climate lawsuits around the world in more than 50 countries and states. This is something which we are tracking and analysing at the Youth Climate Justice project.

From PBS Hawa'i, interview with the campaigners behind Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Dept. of Transportation legal action

In many cases, such as Navahine v. Hawai‘i Department of Transportation, significant victories have been secured for climate rights. This ended in 2024 in a comprehensive mutual agreement between the youth and the State of Hawai’i to drastically reduce emissions, and to include children in the ongoing plans to enhance climate justice over the next decade. Navahine plaintiff Mesina D. said that her lawsuit’s success could not have been achieved without the blueprint laid by the Juliana youth plaintiffs: "They took on the most powerful government in the world, and their resilience and perseverance showed us that it’s possible to stand up for what’s right and demand justice, even in the face of overwhelming odds."

The numerous youth climate cases coming down the line will likely have greater success in states that have written environmental rights into their constitutions. In another landmark youth led case, Held v Montana, the litigants tackled the limitations in Montana on considering environmental factors when deciding oil and gas permits. The court agreed in 2023 that the limitations violated the right to a safe environment contained in Montana’s constitution.

These cases are significant on two levels. First, children and youth struggle to access justice systems, and these cases show that the environment is an issue which they can and will take on in court (although the dismissal of their case shows the ongoing barriers they face). Many youth have communication skills, environmental knowledge and other competencies which mean they are powerful advocates for the environment.

There is an assumption that parents unduly pressure children to take these cases, and indeed the welfare of children and youth litigants have to be considered at all times. In Juliana, however, many parents were actually persuaded by their children to get involved. Many of these young litigants take these cases because they are being affected by climate change right now – it is not just a future issue for them. Levi D. in Juliana for example is a teenager who had to move from his island home in Florida, due to the risk of flooding caused by the climate crisis.

The second point of great significance is that these cases show that governments are not doing enough to tackle the climate crisis, and courts can help hold them to account. Courts all over the world are being asked to do so by children and youth. All the way on the other side of the world in South Africa, children are relying on cases like Juliana to fight their own climate battles in court. The youth-led African Climate Alliance case recently stopped government plans to commission more coal powered energy in South Africa, aided amongst other arguments by the reasoning in Held and Juliana.

Youth climate cases which are still ongoing include a rights-based claim by youth against six private companies in Japan; an Irish grandfather, a toddler and a young person together taking on climate injustice, and several US cases where the youth persevere despite many setbacks, inspired by the Juliana champions.

The law has been failing to meet the challenges of the climate crisis, but many children and youth have not

The Juliana plaintiffs brought their case on their own behalf, but they also represent other children, and adults, and even those who will be born in the future, who are more at risk from climate change and the ‘flooding, heat stress, water scarcity, poverty, and hunger’ that is likely to ensue. The climate crisis is partially reversible. Youth litigants are taking up this responsibility and are continuing the fight to act on their duty to the planet and to each other.

The law has been failing to meet the challenges of the climate crisis, but many children and youth have not. They are pushing the limits of what is legally possible, and provoking policies that might just do enough to mitigate the climate crisis.

Follow the RTÉ Brainstorm WhatsApp channel for more stories and updates

Prof Aoife Daly leads the Youth Climate Justice project, which funded by the European Research Council, at the School of Law at ERI/UCC. Liesl Muller is a PhD researcher at the Youth Climate Justice project at the School of Law at ERI/UCC and a lawyer at the Centre for Child Law at the University of Pretoria.