trending Market Intelligence /marketintelligence/en/news-insights/trending/uo9rpa0b1novuhmk5-8v8w2 content esgSubNav
In This List

Supreme Court lifts hold on youth climate lawsuit

Podcast

Next in Tech | Episode 49: Carbon reduction in cloud

Blog

Using ESG Analysis to Support a Sustainable Future

Research

US utility commissioners: Who they are and how they impact regulation

Blog

Q&A: Datacenters: Energy Hogs or Sustainability Helpers?


Supreme Court lifts hold on youth climate lawsuit

The U.S. Supreme Court has lifted its hold on trial proceedings in a lawsuit brought by a group of youth who want the government to do more on climate change.

The federal government has been fighting the case since 2015 when two environmental groups and 21 children filed suit in the district court against then-President Barack Obama, numerous federal agencies and executive branch officials. The plaintiffs alleged the government has a constitutional responsibility to take more steps to curb carbon dioxide emissions and address climate change.

Shortly before the case was set to go to trial in late October, the Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to order a lower court to dismiss the lawsuit. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. put the case on hold while the high court considered the request.

The case, Juliana v. United States (docket: 6:15-cv-01517), is pending before Judge Ann Aiken of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, Eugene Division. The trial is expected to last for weeks and feature experts on the climate, government and other topics, but no high-ranking federal officials are expected to be called on to testify. As of the morning of Nov. 5, Aiken had not updated the trial schedule.

If a federal court ultimately rules that the government must act on climate change, it could have wide-reaching implications for U.S. energy policy, particularly if the case is resolved during the current administration, which has moved to unwind regulations holding back fossil-fuel development.

On Nov. 2, the Supreme Court rejected the federal government's request on a technicality and lifted the stay. The high court found that the government's petition for a writ of mandamus does not have a fair prospect of success at the Supreme Court because "relief may be available" in the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.

"Although the 9th Circuit has twice denied the government’s request for mandamus relief, it did so without prejudice," the Supreme Court said. "And the court’s basis for denying relief rested, in large part, on the early stage of the litigation, the likelihood that plaintiffs’ claims would narrow as the case progressed, and the possibility of attaining relief through ordinary dispositive motions."

The 9th Circuit on Nov. 2 denied the federal government's writ-of-mandamus petition for the third time. The government had asked the 9th Circuit to stay the lower court trial in light of the Supreme Court considering the case.

"Given the issuance of the temporary stay order and the fact that there is no request before us other than for a stay pending Supreme Court consideration, petitioner’s non-substantive emergency motion for a stay is denied as moot," the 9th Circuit said.