Youth Sue Over Trump Executive Orders That 'Escalate' Climate Crisis
"He's waging war on us with fossil fuels as his weapon, and we're fighting back with the Constitution," said one of the 22 plaintiffs.
Eva Lighthiser, a 19-year-old from Livingston, Montana, is the named plaintiff in a federal lawsuit targeting three of U.S. President Donald Trump's anti-climate executive orders.
(Photo: Our Children's Trust)
Jessica Corbett
May 29, 2025
COMMMON DREAMS
Nearly two dozen American children and young adults sued U.S. President Donald Trump, leaders in his administration, and various agencies in federal court on Thursday over a trio of executive orders they argue "escalate" the climate emergency that imperils their futures.
Lighthiser v. Trump, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana, challenges executive orders (EOs) 14156, 14154, and 14261—which, respectively, declared a "national energy emergency," directed agencies to "unleash" American energy by accelerating fossil fuel development, and called for boosting the country's coal industry.
"Trump's fossil fuel orders are a death sentence for my generation," said named plaintiff Eva Lighthiser in a statement. "I'm not suing because I want to—I'm suing because I have to. My health, my future, and my right to speak the truth are all on the line. He's waging war on us with fossil fuels as his weapon, and we're fighting back with the Constitution."
Specifically, the complaint argues that "the EOs violate the Fifth Amendment substantive due process clause on their face by depriving plaintiffs of their fundamental rights to life and liberty." The filing also states that the orders are ultra vires—meaning they go beyond Trump's presidential authority "in assuming powers reserved to and exercised by Congress through Article I" of the U.S. Constitution.
"From day one of the current administration, President Trump has issued directives to increase fossil fuel use and production, and block an energy transition to wind, solar, battery storage, energy efficiency, and electric vehicles," the complaint reads. "President Trump's EOs falsely claim an energy emergency, while the true emergency is that fossil fuel pollution is destroying the foundation of plaintiffs' lives."
"These unconstitutional directives have the immediate effect of (a) slowing the buildout of U.S. energy infrastructure that eliminates planet-heating fossil fuel greenhouse gas pollution... and (b) increasing the use of fossil fuels that pollute the air, water, lands, and climate on which plaintiffs' lives depend," the filing stresses.
The youth are asking the district court to declare Trump's EOs and related executive actions "unlawful, unconstitutional, ultra vires, and invalid," and to issue a permanent injunction blocking the long list of defendants from implementing or enforcing them.
Lighthiser is a 19-year-old from Livingston, Montana. She and 24-year-old Rikki Held are among 10 of 22 plaintiffs in this case who were also part of Held v. State of Montana, in which a judge in 2023 agreed with young residents who argued that Montana violated their state constitutional rights by promoting fossil fuel extraction. The Montana Supreme Court upheld that decision last December.
Both groups of young plaintiffs are represented by Our Children's Trust, known for several youth climate lawsuits, including Juliana v. United States, the landmark constitutional case that the U.S. Supreme Court ended in March.
Lead attorney Julia Olson of Our Children's Trust said Thursday that "these executive orders are an overt abuse of power. The president is knowingly putting young people's lives in danger to serve fossil fuel interests, while silencing scientists and defying laws passed by Congress."
"These young plaintiffs refuse to be collateral damage in a fossil fuel war on their future," Olson continued. "They are demanding accountability where it still matters—in a court of law. The executive branch is not above the Constitution, and these young people are here to prove it."
For Lighthiser v. Trump, Our Children's Trust has partnered with Gregory Law Group, McGarvey Law, and Public Justice.
"The government's actions irreparably harm our nation's most important asset: our children," said Dan Snyder, director of the Environmental Enforcement Project for Public Justice. "The science is irrefutable that humans and their pollution are causing climate change, and that a changing climate will result in a growing list of injuries that are uniquely felt by America's youngest population."
"Our children enjoy the same constitutional rights to life and liberty as adults, yet have been tasked with shouldering the impact of a destabilized climate system without ever having a say in the matter," he added. "President Trump's executive orders are unlawful and intolerable, and these youth plaintiffs shall put an end to it."
"He's waging war on us with fossil fuels as his weapon, and we're fighting back with the Constitution," said one of the 22 plaintiffs.
Eva Lighthiser, a 19-year-old from Livingston, Montana, is the named plaintiff in a federal lawsuit targeting three of U.S. President Donald Trump's anti-climate executive orders.
(Photo: Our Children's Trust)
Jessica Corbett
May 29, 2025
COMMMON DREAMS
Nearly two dozen American children and young adults sued U.S. President Donald Trump, leaders in his administration, and various agencies in federal court on Thursday over a trio of executive orders they argue "escalate" the climate emergency that imperils their futures.
Lighthiser v. Trump, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana, challenges executive orders (EOs) 14156, 14154, and 14261—which, respectively, declared a "national energy emergency," directed agencies to "unleash" American energy by accelerating fossil fuel development, and called for boosting the country's coal industry.
"Trump's fossil fuel orders are a death sentence for my generation," said named plaintiff Eva Lighthiser in a statement. "I'm not suing because I want to—I'm suing because I have to. My health, my future, and my right to speak the truth are all on the line. He's waging war on us with fossil fuels as his weapon, and we're fighting back with the Constitution."
Specifically, the complaint argues that "the EOs violate the Fifth Amendment substantive due process clause on their face by depriving plaintiffs of their fundamental rights to life and liberty." The filing also states that the orders are ultra vires—meaning they go beyond Trump's presidential authority "in assuming powers reserved to and exercised by Congress through Article I" of the U.S. Constitution.
"From day one of the current administration, President Trump has issued directives to increase fossil fuel use and production, and block an energy transition to wind, solar, battery storage, energy efficiency, and electric vehicles," the complaint reads. "President Trump's EOs falsely claim an energy emergency, while the true emergency is that fossil fuel pollution is destroying the foundation of plaintiffs' lives."
"These unconstitutional directives have the immediate effect of (a) slowing the buildout of U.S. energy infrastructure that eliminates planet-heating fossil fuel greenhouse gas pollution... and (b) increasing the use of fossil fuels that pollute the air, water, lands, and climate on which plaintiffs' lives depend," the filing stresses.
The youth are asking the district court to declare Trump's EOs and related executive actions "unlawful, unconstitutional, ultra vires, and invalid," and to issue a permanent injunction blocking the long list of defendants from implementing or enforcing them.
Lighthiser is a 19-year-old from Livingston, Montana. She and 24-year-old Rikki Held are among 10 of 22 plaintiffs in this case who were also part of Held v. State of Montana, in which a judge in 2023 agreed with young residents who argued that Montana violated their state constitutional rights by promoting fossil fuel extraction. The Montana Supreme Court upheld that decision last December.
Both groups of young plaintiffs are represented by Our Children's Trust, known for several youth climate lawsuits, including Juliana v. United States, the landmark constitutional case that the U.S. Supreme Court ended in March.
Lead attorney Julia Olson of Our Children's Trust said Thursday that "these executive orders are an overt abuse of power. The president is knowingly putting young people's lives in danger to serve fossil fuel interests, while silencing scientists and defying laws passed by Congress."
"These young plaintiffs refuse to be collateral damage in a fossil fuel war on their future," Olson continued. "They are demanding accountability where it still matters—in a court of law. The executive branch is not above the Constitution, and these young people are here to prove it."
For Lighthiser v. Trump, Our Children's Trust has partnered with Gregory Law Group, McGarvey Law, and Public Justice.
"The government's actions irreparably harm our nation's most important asset: our children," said Dan Snyder, director of the Environmental Enforcement Project for Public Justice. "The science is irrefutable that humans and their pollution are causing climate change, and that a changing climate will result in a growing list of injuries that are uniquely felt by America's youngest population."
"Our children enjoy the same constitutional rights to life and liberty as adults, yet have been tasked with shouldering the impact of a destabilized climate system without ever having a say in the matter," he added. "President Trump's executive orders are unlawful and intolerable, and these youth plaintiffs shall put an end to it."
"These fossil fuel actors should be held accountable to the victims of their lethal conduct, and this wrongful death suit provides a compelling new approach for climate victims moving forward."
A billboard displays a temperature of 118°F during a record heatwave in Phoenix, Arizona on July 18, 2023.
(Photo: Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)
Julia Conley
May 29, 2025
COMMON DREAMS
Two years after legal scholars wrote in the Harvard Environmental Law Review that fossil fuel companies could feasibly be charged with homicide in cases of people who are killed by climate-fueled extreme weather events, one woman is taking a major step toward holding oil and gas giants accountable for a specific death—that of her mother, who died during an extreme heatwave in 2021.
Misti Leon filed a civil lawsuit against Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips, Phillips 66, and BP subsidiary Olympic Pipeline Company, arguing that their knowledge going back decades that extracting oil and gas would heat the planet makes them liable for the death of her mother, Juliana.
Juliana Leon, who was 65, was making a 100-mile drive home from a doctor's appointment in Seattle on June 28, 2021 when she pulled over and rolled down her car windows. Emergency workers found her hours later having died of hyperthermia, or overheating, with her body temperature having reached 110°F.
A heat dome had settled over the Pacific Northwest, with high pressure trapping hot air over the region, and the World Weather Attribution later found that the heat dome would have been "virtually impossible" without climate change resulting from fossil fuel emissions.
About 600 more people died in Oregon and Washington in late June 2021 than would have been typical for a one-week period, and Leon is arguing that the death of her mother from hyperthermia, or overheating, was the direct result of fossil fuel companies' actions.
Leon is arguing in the case that, as numerous investigations have found, fossil fuel companies have known for decades that extracting oil and gas would cause planet-heating emissions and could result in extreme, potentially deadly weather events like heatwaves, flooding, and wildfires.
"The purpose of criminal law enforcement is to deter future crimes, promote public safety, punish wrongdoers, and encourage the convicted to pursue less harmful practices. All of these public safety goals apply to Big Oil's continuing contributions to climate change."
"Why shouldn't we hold someone legally accountable for this kind of behavior?" David Arkush, director of Public Citizen's Climate Program and a co-author of the Harvard Environmental Law Review paper, toldThe New York Times. "There would be no question that we would hold them accountable if they caused other types of deaths. This is no different. They foresaw this, they did it anyway, and they hurt people."
Lee Wasserman of the Rockefeller Family Fund called the lawsuit an "important moment for climate accountability."
Although Leon's case is the first, according to legal experts, to attempt to hold fossil fuel giants accountable for a specific death, it is a significant step in a wider effort to bring the industry to justice for its role in causing weather disasters.
Vermont and New York both passed climate superfund laws last year that would allow the states to hold oil companies financially liable for extreme weather events and force them to pay for damages. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has announced lawsuits against the two states over the laws.
In the past decade, dozens of localities and states have also filed lawsuits against oil and gas companies for hiding their knowledge of the impact fossil fuel extraction would have on average global temperatures and the climate.
Aaron Regunberg, accountability project director for Public Citizen's Climate Program, said climate disasters like the one that allegedly killed Juliana Leon "are the foreseeable, and foreseen, consequences of specific actions by fossil fuel corporations, CEOs, and boards of directors."
"They caused the climate crisis and deceived the public about the dangerousness of their products in order to block and delay solutions that could prevent heat deaths like Juliana's," said Regunberg. "These fossil fuel actors should be held accountable to the victims of their lethal conduct, and this wrongful death suit provides a compelling new approach for climate victims moving forward."
"The purpose of criminal law enforcement is to deter future crimes, promote public safety, punish wrongdoers, and encourage the convicted to pursue less harmful practices," he added. "All of these public safety goals apply to Big Oil's continuing contributions to climate change, and prosecutors across the country should take note of this new wrongful death suit and carefully consider how the climate effects their constituents are experiencing fit the criminal laws they are charged with enforcing."
No comments:
Post a Comment