319
submitted 1 year ago by jokeyrhyme@lemmy.ml to c/green@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 19 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Experts previously predicted that a win for youths in Montana would set an important legal precedent for how courts can hold states accountable for climate inaction.

The same legal organization representing Montana's young plaintiffs, Our Children's Trust, is currently pursuing similar cases in four other states, The Washington Post reported.

Montana tried to argue that adjusting its energy policy and other statutes would have “no meaningful impact or appreciable effect,” the Post reported, because climate change is a global issue.

Montana Assistant Attorney General Michael Russell described the testimony as a “week-long airing of political grievances that properly belong in the Legislature, not a court of law,” according to the Post.

Another attorney for plaintiffs and executive director of Our Children's Trust, Julia Olson, told AP that the ruling was a "huge win for Montana, for youth, for democracy, and for our climate."

To young people suing, winning is seemingly just about pushing the state to embrace climate science and mitigate known harms moving forward.


I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Vlhacs@reddthat.com 7 points 1 year ago

This summary doesn't tell us what they ruled on at all.

this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
319 points (99.7% liked)

Green - An environmentalist community

5297 readers
1 users here now

This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!


RULES:

1- Remember the human

2- Link posts should come from a reputable source

3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith


Related communities:


Unofficial Chat rooms:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS