Skip to main content

Case Law Database

Lighthiser v. Trump

Date of Application:Thu, 29 May 2025
Decision Making Body:Montana District Court
Law Applied:Montana Constitution
Public Trust Doctrine
Public Trust Doctrine
Keywords:Suits against governments, Environmental assessment and permitting, Natural resource extraction, Judicial declaration, Injunction
Full Case Details - Download Full Judgment (pdf)

Lighthiser v. Trump Docket number(s): 2:25-cv-00054 Court/Admin Entity: D. Mont.

Description: Youth plaintiffs' lawsuit challenging Trump energy executive orders as violative of substantive due process rights and ultra vires.
Summary:
Youth Plaintiffs Filed Lawsuit Challenging Constitutionality of Trump Energy Executive Orders. Twenty-two youth plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the District of Montana against President Trump and federal agencies and officials alleging that three energy-related executive orders violate their substantive due process rights and are ultra vires. The three executive orders are: Executive Order 14154, “Unleashing American Energy”; Executive Order 14156, “Declaring a National Energy Emergency”; and Executive Order 14261, “Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending Executive Order 14241.” The plaintiffs alleged that the executive orders’ directive will slow the development of clean energy infrastructure and increase use of fossil fuels, as well as “dismantle[e] the climate science and climate change warning infrastructure of the Nation.” The complaint asserted claims of substantive due process violations of right to life and right to liberty, as well as claims that the executive orders and agency implementation of them were ultra vires exercises of power that “illegally amended, repealed, rescinded, and circumvented” federal statutes, including the 1970 law creating EPA, the Clean Air Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act. The complaint also asserted that the termination of the National Climate Assessment and “wholesale suppression of climate science research and data across the federal government” were ultra vires. In addition, the complaint included a claim that the executive orders and implementing actions were unconstitutional under the state-created danger doctrine. The plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief.  
On 25 June 2025, the court issued an order setting a schedule for any motion to dismiss and scheduling a hearing on September 16-17, 2025 on the plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction and the defendants' anticipated motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs had requested an evidentiary hearing on their motion; the court directed that the parties file notice of any expected witness testimony by September 2.
On 8 July 2025, a brief was filed in support of motion to intervene as intervenor-defendants by State of Montana, 18 other states, and one territory.

Lighthiser v. Trump - Climate Change Litigation

Summary provided courtesy of the Sabin Centre https://climatecasechart.com/
Court documents:

Related CRC articles

  • 6. Right to life, survival and development (CRC Article 6)
  • 16. Right to privacy, family, home, communications and reputation (CRC Article 16)
  • 24. Right to health, healthcare, and a healthy environment (CRC Article 24)
  • 30. Right to minority culture, language, religion (CRC Article 30)
  • 31. Right to rest, play, leisure and participate in cultural activities (CRC Article 31)
The plaintiffs rely on right to life (Fifth Amendment).
Petition:
Par 255 "A government’s deprivation of the fundamental right to life does not occur only at death. The fundamental right to life, as the Framers intended, includes the right of living, breathing persons to enjoy this terrestrial existence and pursue happiness in living. At the time of the Nation’s founding, terrestrial existence was predicated on a life-sustaining, stable climate system. The fundamental right to life includes vitality, or health, and a person’s natural lifespan. By natural extension, for children and youth whose organs and bodies are still developing, the right to life includes their ability to develop healthfully into their full adult living form."
Par 265 "Defendants’ EOs and their implementation deprive Plaintiffs of recognized unenumerated liberty interests, including their personal security, bodily integrity, dignity, opportunity to pursue happiness, the right to practice culture, and the right to form families."
Par 269 "Plaintiffs who live in Montana and Hawai‘i also have a Fifth Amendment unenumerated liberty interest in their state constitutional fundamental rights to a clean and healthful environment and a stable life-sustaining climate system, which their state courts have recognized. Defendants’ EOs violate Montana and Hawai‘i Plaintiffs’ state-defined substantive due process liberty interests by “unleashing” fossil fuels and blocking wind, solar, storage, efficiency, and EVs in Montana and Hawai‘i, exacerbating GHG pollution in Plaintiffs’ environment and worsening a destabilized climate system, where both States’ courts have found that additional GHG pollution causes constitutional injuries."
Par 329 "The issuance and implementation of the EOs constitute state-created dangers, violate Defendants’ constitutional duty to Plaintiffs, and deprive Plaintiffs’ of their liberty rights to personal security. As a result, Plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief to protect the status quo during the pendency of the case, declaratory relief, and further relief as necessary to enforce the judgment."

Involvement of children in hearings

  • Written presentation

The plaintiffs have submitted written testimony, including evidence on their individual circumstances. There is the possibility of oral presentations at some point in the future proceedings. 

Future generations

Petition:
Par 11 "As a fifth-generation Montanan, Rikki is committed to protecting a clean and healthful environment and stable climate system, which the viability of her family’s ranch depends on, for future generations."
Par 154 "In response to Executive Order 14154, on March 12, 2025, Administrator Zeldin directed EPA to reconsider its 2009 Endangerment Finding that the current and projected concentrations of GHG emissions threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations, which would thwart EPA’s ability to regulate GHG pollution."
Par 295 "Because other remedies at law have been curtailed, EPA’s faithful execution of the law is vital. EPA must conduct its programs to protect the quality of the air and water for the benefit of human health and welfare, including for present and future generations, pursuant to the authorities under which EPA operates."
Par 298 “Unleashing” more climate pollution is certainly a question with vast economic and political significance, which would have to be expressly stated in any legislation passed by Congress and then measured against the Constitution. Congress’ constitutional mandate is to enact laws that reserve the perpetuity of the Nation based on the sovereignty of the People, including present and future generations of children, accounted for in the Posterity Clause, who will one day exercise the political franchise and their own sovereign power and have equal rights under the Constitution.

Outcome of decision for the applicants

  • Decision pending

Involvement of NGO/law firm in application

Roger Sullivan
McGARVEY LAW
Philip L. Gregory*
GREGORY LAW GROUP
Daniel C. Snyder*
Haley Nicholson*
PUBLIC JUSTICE

Available information on how children got involved in the litigation

Age range of litigants

  • 0-7
  • 8-12
  • 13-17
  • 18-25

Number of children or youth involved

22

Top