Journally Speaking: A new age

On Mar. 7, Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas, writing for a unanimous three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, rejected US President Donald Trump administration’s “drastic and extraordinary” petition for writ of mandamus in an unprecedented constitutional climate change lawsuit brought against the federal government by 21 youth plaintiffs (ages 9-21) from across the country seeking to secure their legal right to a stable climate and healthy atmosphere (OGJ, Nov. 13, 2017, p. 14).

Despite protests by counsel for the Trump administration and US government defendants during Dec. 11 oral arguments before the court that, if allowed to proceed to trial, the case would become “the trial of the century,” that’s exactly where Juliana v. United States is heading.

Originally scheduled for trial on Feb. 5, counsel for the plaintiffs said they will ask for a new trial date before yearend.

Illumination

Contrary to reports from media outlets with an agenda—political or otherwise—Juliana v. United States is not about the government’s failure to act on climate. Instead, the youth plaintiffs assert that the government, through its affirmative actions in creating a national energy system that contributes to climate change, has violated their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property, and has failed to protect essential public trust resources. The case is one of many related legal actions brought by youth in several states and countries, all of which are seeking science-based action by governments to stabilize the climate system.

Why care, you wonder?

The answer is a simple one. No matter the outcome, the case signals the inevitable shift many in the petroleum industry never believed would come. It has little to do with whether one is pro or anti the hydrocarbons industry but everything to do with how that industry operates. While major industry trade groups collectively representing every major US oil and natural gas company earlier dismissed themselves as codefendants in the lawsuit, the shadow cast by historical deals between the US government, its elected officials, and industry leaders are long, and with the case now moving forward, likely will come to light.

For those that only months ago were certain the lawsuit hadn’t a sliver of a chance of proceeding, welcome to the unavoidable age of illumination.

For the record

Below is a sampling of admissions already submitted by the federal government in its answer to plaintiffs’ original complaint, now part of the case record:

• That for more than 50 years some officials and persons employed by the federal government have been aware of a growing body of scientific research concerning the effects of fossil fuel emissions on atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide—including that increased concentrations of atmospheric CO₂ could cause measurable long-lasting changes to the global climate, resulting in an array of severe deleterious effects to human beings that will worsen over time.
• That global atmospheric concentrations of CO₂, methane, and nitrous oxide are at unprecedentedly high levels compared with the previous 800,000 years of historical data, posing risks to human health and welfare.
• That there’s a scientific consensus the buildup of greenhouse gases, including CO2, from human activities, including fossil fuel combustion, is changing the global climate in a way threatening to human health and the environment.
• That CO₂ emissions are currently altering the atmosphere’s composition and will continue to alter earth’s climate for thousands of years.
• As evidenced by a 1965 White House Report on “Restoring the Quality of Our Environment,” that human activity—particularly elevated GHG concentrations—is likely to have been the dominant cause of observed warming since the mid-1900s.
• That climate change is damaging human and natural systems, increasing the risk of loss of life, and requiring adaptation on larger and faster scales than current species have successfully achieved in the past, potentially increasing the risk of extinction or severe disruption for many species.
• That current and projected atmospheric concentrations of six well-mixed GHGs, including CO₂, threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations, and that this threat will mount over time as GHGs continue accumulating in the atmosphere to result in more accelerated rates of climate change.