Case Law Database
Navahine F. v. Hawai‘i Department of Transportation
| Date of Application: | Wed, 01 Jun 2022 |
|---|---|
| Date of Decision: | Thu, 20 Jun 2024 |
| Decision Making Body: | The Circuit Court of the First Circuit State of Hawai'i |
| Law Applied: | Hawai'i Climate Change Laws Hawai'i Constitution Hawai'i Endangered Species Statute |
| Keywords: | Public trust doctrine, Right to a clean and healthful environment |
| Full Case Details - Download Full Judgment (pdf) |
Navahine F. v. Hawai‘i Department of Transportation 1CCV-22-0000631
At issue: Youth plaintiffs' lawsuit alleging that the establishment, operation, and maintenance of Hawai‘i’s state transportation system violates the Hawai‘i Constitution’s public trust doctrine and right to a clean and healthful environment.
Youth Plaintiffs Filed Lawsuit Alleging Hawai‘i State Transportation System Violated Constitutional Environmental Protections. Fourteen young people filed a lawsuit in Hawai‘i Circuit Court alleging that establishment, operation, and maintenance of Hawai‘i’s state transportation system violates the Hawai‘i Constitution’s public trust doctrine and infringes on the right provided by the Hawai‘i Constitution to a clean and healthful environments defined by a “growing body” of Hawai‘i laws that seek to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The defendants are the Hawai‘i Department of Transportation (HDOT), HDOT’s Director, Governor David Ige, and the State of Hawai‘i. The youth plaintiffs alleged that the defendants are responsible for “high and untenable levels of greenhouse gas emissions because they have engaged in an ongoing pattern and practice of promoting, funding, and implementing transportation projects that lock in and escalate the use of fossil fuels, rather than projects that mitigate and reduce emissions,” including by prioritizing infrastructure projects such as highway construction and expansion. The plaintiffs’ allegations also included that HDOT did not cooperate or coordinate with other agencies to meet Hawai‘i’s greenhouse gas reduction goals, including a 2045 Zero Emissions Target established by state law in 2021, and that HDOT failed to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from its own operations. The plaintiffs requested declaratory relief and also injunctive relief in the form of an order directing the defendants to cease establishing, maintaining, and operating the transportation system in a manner that breaches the defendants’ constitutional obligations and compelling the defendants to take “concrete action steps under prescribed deadlines” to conform the transportation system to the defendants’ constitutional duties. They also asked the court to exercise continuing jurisdiction and oversight, including through appointment of special master.
In Settlement with Youth Plaintiffs, Hawai‘i Agreed to Actions to Bring Transportation Sector Emissions to Zero by 2045. On June 20, 2024, the Hawai‘i Circuit Court approved a settlement resolving claims brought by youth plaintiffs against the Hawai‘i Department of Transportation and other State defendants (HDOT). The plaintiffs alleged that the establishment, operation, and maintenance of Hawai‘i’s state transportation system violates the Hawai‘i Constitution’s public trust doctrine and right to a clean and healthful environment. The settlement agreement—which was approved four days before a trial was scheduled to begin—includes a “Recognition of Rights” that enumerates the plaintiffs’ rights and the defendants’ obligations under the Hawai‘i Constitution, state statutes, and Hawai‘i Supreme Court precedent. The agreement requires HDOT to take actions to achieve a “Zero Emissions Target” for ground and sea and air interisland transportation sectors by 2045, as required by a 2018 law. HDOT must set interim greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets for 2030, 2035, and 2040 and must develop “a concrete and comprehensive statewide plan” by May 2025 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with this schedule. The settlement agreement specifies elements that the plan must include and provides for specific opportunities for the youth plaintiffs and the public to provide comments and feedback on the plan and on annual updates. The agreement also requires development and use of “a process and criteria for evaluating, selecting, and prioritizing projects” in transportation planning, as well as a “an objective, scientifically-based methodology to assess and report the total, long-term [greenhouse gas] emission and [vehicle miles traveled] impacts of each infrastructure project.” In addition, the agreement requires that HDOT establish a climate change mitigation unit within HDOT and a volunteer youth advisory council. The agreement includes commitments by HDOT to take actions to accelerate expansion of the electric vehicle charging network; accelerate expansion of multimodal transportation choices; develop and implement policies to achieve zero emissions; and increase efforts to sequester carbon. The agreement establishes dispute resolution procedures; once a party complies with these procedures, the party may bring a motion in the Circuit Court to enforce the agreement. The court retains jurisdiction of the case until the earlier of December 31, 2045 or the date on which the Zero Emissions Target is achieved.
Summary provided courtesy of the Sabin Centre
Access a child-friendly summary of this case here: Navahine F. v. Hawai‘i Department of Transportation Child-friendly Summary
Court documents:
Related CRC articles
- 12. Right to express views freely and have these taken into account (CRC Article 12)
- 24. Right to health, healthcare, and a healthy environment (CRC Article 24)
In the settlement order:
“Youth Plaintiffs have constitutional rights to a clean and healthful environment consistent with article XI, section 9 of the Hawai'i Constitution” page 3.
“c. HDOT will also establish a volunteer youth council to advise on HDOT's mitigation and adaptation commitments on a quarterly basis, with transparency about youth council recommendations and HDOT's responses. The inaugural volunteer youth council will be open to Youth Plaintiffs' participation through the regular application process and at least two of the youth council seats will be allocated to Youth Plaintiffs should they choose to apply. HDOT will provide email notice to the Youth Plaintiffs, through their counsel, when applications for the inaugural volunteer youth council open.” page 9.
Involvement of children in hearings
- Written presentation
The complaint contains the names and personal circumstances of each child. There is no presentation to the court in their own voices.
The children are cited in their own names but “by and through her natural guardian”.
Future generations
Future generations are referenced in both the complaint and the settlement order.
In the settlement order:
Page 4 “The State has affirmative public trust obligations under article XI, section 1 of the Hawai'i Constitution to conserve and protect "Hawai'i's natural beauty and all natural resources, including land, water, air, minerals and energy sources" "[f]or the benefit of present and future generations."
Outcome of decision for the applicants
- Relief sought by applicants granted
The matter was settled between the parties and their agreement was made an order of court.
The settlement agreement includes a “Recognition of Rights” that enumerates the plaintiffs’ rights and the defendants’ obligations under the Hawai‘i Constitution, state statutes, and Hawai‘i Supreme Court precedent.
The settlement agreement specifies elements that the plan must include and provides for specific opportunities for the youth plaintiffs and the public to provide comments and feedback on the plan and on annual updates.
In addition, the agreement requires that HDOT establish a climate change mitigation unit within HDOT and a volunteer youth advisory council.
Did outcome of decision develop the law
- Yes
This is the world’s first settled climate justice case.
Although not a judgment by a court, a court must endorse a settlement before making it an order of court. It remains to be seen to what extent future applicants can rely on it, but it could certainly inspire future litigation.
The settlement order includes a provision that a volunteer youth council be established in order to consult with youth on an ongoing basis.
Involvement of NGO/law firm in application
Available information on how children got involved in the litigation
Home - OCT Hawaii (ourchildrenstrust.org)
Age range of litigants
- 8-12
- 13-17
- 18-25
Number of children or youth involved
13