The following article, written by student reporters, is part of a series of reflections from the Climate Constitutionalism Conference, hosted by Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University on March 29, 2024. The event brought together legal scholars, activists, and students for a series of discussions on major environmental constitutional issues. Visit the GreenLaw homepage for links to other articles in the series.

Student reporters Rachel Neave and Drew Mulcahy prepared this summary of the roundtable discussion featuring panelist Bill Funk, Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus, Lewis & Clark Law School, and invited discussant Martha F. Davis, University Distinguished Professor of Law, Northeastern University School of Law. Roundtable participants included Haub Environmental Law Visiting Assistant Professor Paul Rink, Widener University Delaware Law School Distinguished Professor of Law James R. May, and International Student Mariam S. Ghalim.

First Takeaway: Juliana and Its Impact

The discussion began with an examination of the broader impact of the Juliana case. Juliana was filed in 2015 by twenty-one youth plaintiffs against the United States claiming that the government violated their constitutional rights by knowingly furthering the climate crisis. Whether or not the Juliana case is successful in holding the government accountable, will the case have a positive impact on the climate movement?

Some believe Juliana is detrimental to the climate rights movement. Based on the current make-up of the Supreme Court, which is controlled by a 6-3 conservative majority, it is unlikely that if the case ends up at the Supreme Court Juliana will be successful in establishing a constitutional right to a healthy environment. That means a negative precedent would be created against the establishment of climate rights, potentially delaying the movement by years. Proponents of this viewpoint also pointed to the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education, which desegregated the American public school system. Due to the make-up of the Supreme Court, the Brown case was a risk at the time because a loss would have been a setback for the movement. It was even discussed that Brown might have had a different ruling if Justice Vinson had not passed away three months prior, which caused Justice Felix Frankfurter to tell a clerk that Vinson’s death was the first indication he had ever had of the existence of God.

Discussants at the roundtable who held the opposing view expressed that even if Juliana is unsuccessful, it could galvanize a broader movement for climate rights. The idea is that the case could bring nationwide awareness to the importance of establishing climate rights and spark a social movement to pressure lawmakers into passing legislation.

Second Takeaway: Legislation as a Potential Solution and International Influence

The next topic briefly discussed was the strategies of recent presidential administrations in defending against climate rights cases. At first, it was believed that some administrations had enforced stronger tactics against climate rights cases than other administrations. Specifically, it seemed that the Biden administration had continued the tactics of the Trump administration; compared to the Obama administration. However, after further discussion, it was determined that all three administrations had deployed similar defense strategies. Ultimately, it was determined that the Department of Justice has acted independently of the three presidential administrations in its decision-making in proceeding against the climate rights cases.

The group then went into a deeper discussion surrounding the potential of using legislation to identify climate rights. Legislation establishing climate rights often goes together with the judicial establishment of a constitutional climate right, so the conversation is important. For sweeping legislation to establish a constitutional right to a healthy climate, it was discussed that a drastic shift in the political environment would have to occur. This relates to the social movement that could potentially spiral with the denial of current climate rights cases. Another factor in support of legislation being passed is that economic interests need to align with the social movements’ interests. Since corporations hold a significant amount of power in the U.S., the corporations need to be economically incentivized to support the movement for climate rights. This led to the idea of compensating companies that have an interest in climate-harming industries, such as fossil fuel companies.

Next, the group briefly discussed international precedents regarding climate rights. The group specifically looked towards the European Union (EU) and its climate policy about businesses. Since the EU enforces stricter policies when it comes to businesses and corporations’ climate impact, it was pondered whether this could influence the United States. If these laws in the EU are shown to be effective in combating climate change, it could persuade lawmakers in the U.S. to implement similar policies.

Third Takeaway: The Impact on Young People

Subsequently, the group discussed the climate crisis’s impact on young people. There was agreement amongst the group that the climate crisis has a powerful impact on the psyche of young people who are inheriting the issues of climate change. The climate crisis changes the way people in general view the future and makes it harder for young people especially to stay hopeful. As a few members of the roundtable discussion were young adults in their mid-twenties, they expressed how the stress of the climate crisis’s unknown future can affect them on a rather intimate and personal level. For example, the climate’s future is in such a questionable and likely negative state that it could potentially be viewed as irresponsible to have children who are going to outlive their Generation Z parents and endure these unprecedented negative conditions without adequate protection.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the discussion shed light on the complex intersectionality between constitutional frameworks, legal strategies, and social movements in the fight for climate rights. The examination of landmark cases like Juliana, the exploration of legislative pathways, and the consideration of international precedents underscored the multifaceted nature of addressing climate justice. Moreover, the recognition of the profound impact of the climate crisis on younger generations emphasized the urgent need for action. As we navigate these challenges, it becomes increasingly evident that collaboration across disciplines and borders, alongside grassroots mobilization, will be essential in forging a path toward a sustainable and equitable future.

 

 

 

Image Credit: Our Children’s Trust #youthvgov, CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons