California Children Plan to Amend Climate Lawsuit After Federal Judge Dismissal
After a federal judge dismissed a landmark climate lawsuit filed by 18 California children against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the youth plaintiffs are planning to amend and resubmit their allegations, according to their attorneys. The children involved in the lawsuit have experienced firsthand the devastating effects of climate change, including losing their homes in wildfires, suffering health problems from breathing polluted air, missing weeks of education due to climate change-related school closures, and being forced to ration tap water due to unprecedented droughts. They sued the EPA for allegedly violating their constitutional rights by allowing pollution from burning fossil fuels to continue despite knowing the harm it poses to children.
Judge Michael Fitzgerald of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ruled that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to bring the suit because they did not show how the remedies they sought would mitigate the harms they had experienced. The ruling granted the plaintiffs permission to amend their complaint by a specified date.
The co-executive director of Our Children’s Trust, the nonprofit law firm representing the plaintiffs, called the judge’s order unjust and stated that they would be filing an amended complaint. The lawsuit, Genesis B. vs. EPA, filed on behalf of plaintiffs aged 8 to 17 at the time, describes climate change as the single greatest driver of the health of every child born today. It alleges that the EPA has intentionally allowed the United States to become one of the world’s biggest contributors to the climate crisis, despite being aware of the harms it causes, especially to children.
The lawsuit also named EPA administrator Michael Regan and the U.S. federal government as defendants. The U.S. Department of Justice attorneys argued that the court did not have the authority to make sweeping public policy changes and petitioned for the suit to be dismissed.
During a hearing, Judge Fitzgerald expressed his inclination to side with the government, stating that decisions regarding public policy changes should rest with Congress and the executive branch. He referenced another climate action case, Juliana vs. U.S., filed in federal court in Oregon, where youth plaintiffs alleged that the government violated their constitutional rights by promoting fossil fuel use despite knowing its harms. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the district court to dismiss that case, stating that the relief sought by the plaintiffs was not likely to mitigate the injuries they claimed to have suffered.
Overall, the dismissal of the climate lawsuit filed by the California children against the EPA highlights the challenges faced in seeking legal remedies for climate change impacts. The plaintiffs’ determination to amend and resubmit their allegations demonstrates their commitment to holding the government accountable for its role in exacerbating the climate crisis and protecting the rights of children affected by environmental harm.