[ad_1]
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Friday night (November 2) has refused to end the "climate for climate change" lawsuit by young Americans to force the federal government to act on climate change, rejecting a request by the Trump government to do it before pretrial. Rayne's Jayden Foytlin is one of 21 plaintiffs. She was then 14 years old when she joined the complaint filed by Our Children's Trust in 2015.
The complainants allege that the inability of the heads of government to fight climate change violates their constitutional right to a clean environment. On standby before a federal judge in Eugene, Oregon, the minutes had been delayed while the Supreme Court was considering the government 's urgent request.
Associate Judges Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch stated that they would have stayed the trial. The other judges did not say how they voted at the request of the government.
Meet the teenager from Louisiana who is suing the federal government over climate change
The court's three-page order stipulated that the government should seek redress before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal in San Francisco. It took note of the Government's statement that "the complaint is based on a set of unprecedented legal theories, such as respect for the legality of the procedure and certain climatic conditions, as well as the right to live in the country. same climate as previous generations ".
The judges acknowledged that the 9th Circuit had previously rejected the government, but they stated that these decisions were made when there was a "likelihood that the complainants' claims would shrink as "advance case". This no longer seems to be the case, the unsigned opinion of the Supreme Court. said, suggesting the possibility that the 9th circuit sees things differently now. And this left open the possibility that the government would return to the Supreme Court.
The complainants are between 11 and 22 years old. The aim of their action is to force the government to reduce its support for the extraction and production of fossil fuels and to support policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming.
"We had confidence throughout this case that we were going to have a trial, and I think we will," said Julia Olson, Youth Lawyer and Executive Director of Our Children's Trust, in an interview Friday night. "We have overcome everything that the government has launched. This is not luck. This is the strength of the case, the strength of the evidence and the strength of the legal arguments that we present. "
Continued climate change filed by Louisiana teenager and 20 other youths frozen by US Supreme Court
The Obama and Trump administrations have repeatedly called on the lower courts to stop the lawsuit, questioning its merits, saying the discovery requests were "expensive" and arguing that this action would usurp Congress authorities and federal agencies. The plaintiffs "are looking for nothing less than a complete transformation of the US energy system – including the abandonment of fossil fuels – ordered by a single district court at the request of" twenty-one children and young people " ", wrote the Solicitor General Noel Francisco in a memorial to the Supreme Court.
"As the government has maintained since the first move to classify this lawsuit in 2016, [the] The affirmation of radical new fundamental rights over certain climatic conditions has no basis in the history and tradition of the nation – and has no place in federal courts. "
Francisco acknowledged that he was seeking "extraordinary relief" by asking the High Court to stop the trial before the start of it. But he said that the unique nature of the trial deserved such an exception. If the long trial were allowed to proceed, "there could be years in the future" before the government "can seek redress for such blatant abuse of civil procedure and a violation of the separation of powers."
The government has made similar arguments in the lower courts, but on many occasions the judges have let the case continue. The government also appealed to the Supreme Court earlier this summer to seek a stay, but in an unsigned notice the claim was described as "premature".
In a 103-page filing this week designed to keep the trial on track, the plaintiffs argued that the Trump administration would not suffer "irreparable" harm if it were to bring the case to an end . "This case clearly raises extremely important constitutional issues, particularly with respect to individual freedom and standing, the answers to which depend on the full evaluation of the evidence at trial," the lawyers wrote, adding, "These young people Complainants, children and youth already suffer from irreparable harm that worsens day by day with the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the oceans.
The young activists once again seized the opportunity to ask the courts to compel the government to "end the violation of the rights of the plaintiffs, to prepare a report on the nation's greenhouse gas emissions and to develop and implement an enforceable national reparations plan to put an end to constitutional violations. phasing out fossil fuel emissions and reducing atmospheric CO2. "
Olson said the young plaintiffs were filing an application for a hearing with the Oregon District Court, hoping to head to the long-awaited trial. Department of Justice officials could not be contacted immediately for a comment on Friday.
. . . . . . .
Story of Brady Dennis and Robert Barnes.
Source link
