Juliana, et al. v. United States of America, et al. was a legal case related to climate change. It was filed in 2015 and dismissed in 2020. The case was brought by 21 young people, members of the Earth Guardians organization, and climatologist James Hansen, who acted as a "guardian for future generations." They sued the United States government and several officials in the federal executive branch. The lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Oregon and was handled by the non-profit group Our Children's Trust. Some fossil fuel and industry groups first joined the case as defendants but later asked to be removed after the 2016 presidential election, saying the case would be well defended under the new administration.

The plaintiffs argued that the government had violated their rights to life, liberty, and property by supporting the burning of fossil fuels. They claimed the government had a duty to protect the environment and asked the court to declare the federal government responsible for preserving the atmosphere and to stop actions that harm it. This case is an example of a legal area called "atmospheric trust litigation," which is based on the public trust doctrine and international responsibilities for natural resources.

In January 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court dismissed the case because the plaintiffs did not have legal standing to bring the lawsuit. This decision was upheld in February 2021. The plaintiffs later filed an updated complaint to address the standing issue, but the Ninth Circuit dismissed it again in May 2024 for the same reason. The Supreme Court of the United States did not accept the case for review by March 2025.

Case history

Climate change lawsuits began in the 1990s. A group called Our Children's Trust, based in Oregon, was started by lawyer Julia Olson to help create legal cases against states and the federal government. These cases argued that governments must take action to reduce climate change under the public trust doctrine, a legal idea that says the government must protect natural resources for future generations. Olson worked with Mary Christina Wood, a law professor at the University of Oregon, who had studied the public trust doctrine and developed the idea of "Atmospheric Trust Litigation" to hold governments accountable for climate change. The group was inspired by similar efforts in the Philippines. Since 2011, Our Children's Trust has filed lawsuits on behalf of young people, but most have been dismissed by courts. Courts often say that lawsuits cannot be based on general concerns and require proof that the government caused specific harm that can be fixed by a court. Cases are also dismissed if they involve "political questions" that only Congress and the president can address.

Some climate change cases reached the Supreme Court. The first was Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency (2007), where 12 states sued the EPA for not regulating greenhouse gas emissions. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the states, saying the EPA must regulate emissions, even if it cannot stop global warming entirely. This case changed how courts view who can sue, allowing one person to prove harm on behalf of others. Later cases were less successful. For example, in 2011, the Supreme Court rejected a lawsuit against power companies for greenhouse gas emissions under a "public nuisance" theory. In 2014, the court partially upheld and partially rejected EPA regulations on emissions, limiting the agency's authority.

In August 2015, a lawsuit was filed in Oregon by 21 young people aged 8 to 19. They were represented by Our Children's Trust and supported by climatologist James Hansen, who acted as a "guardian for future generations." One of the plaintiffs was Hansen's granddaughter. The case argued that the government violated the youths' rights by failing to address climate change, which caused harm like flooding, rising sea levels, and desertification. The lawsuit was filed against President Barack Obama and federal agencies, asking the court to order the government to create a plan to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The youths' lawyers claimed that inaction on climate change unfairly harmed their generation, as they would face the worst effects but have no voting power.

Three fossil fuel groups initially joined the government in opposing the case. Pre-trial hearings were held in 2016, and a judge ruled that the case had enough merit to continue. In 2016, another judge compared the right to a stable climate to the right to marriage equality, as decided in a Supreme Court case. This was the first time a federal court suggested there might be a constitutional right to a healthy environment. Trial dates were set for 2017.

After the 2016 election, the government denied the lawsuit's claims, saying it did not cause climate change or its effects. The lead defendant was later changed to President Donald Trump. Fossil fuel groups left the case, believing the new administration would defend it more strongly. In 2017, a judge set a trial date for 2018. The government also asked a higher court to review a previous decision, arguing that the case involved legal theories too new for courts to handle.

Involved parties

The people who filed the case are:

• Kelsey Cascadia Rose Juliana
• Xiuhtezcatl Martinez (with a guardian when he was a minor)
• Jacob Lebel
• Zealand Bell (with a guardian)
• Avery McRae (with a guardian)
• Sahara Valentine (with a guardian)
• Tia Hatton
• Isaac Vergun (with a guardian)
• Miko Vergun (with a guardian)
• Hazel Van Ummersen (with a guardian)
• Jamie Lynn Butler (with a guardian)
• Journey Zephier (with a guardian)
• Vic Barrett
• Nathan Baring
• Aji Piper (with a guardian)
• Levi Draheim (with a guardian)
• Jayden Foytlin (with a guardian)
• Nic Venner (with a guardian)
• Kiran Oommen
• Alex Loznak
• Sophie Kivlehan
• The organization Earth Guardians
• Future generations, represented by James Hansen

• The United States of America
• Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality
• Mick Mulvaney, Director of the Office of Management and Budget
• Chair of the Office of Science and Technology Policy
• United States Department of Energy, Rick Perry, United States Secretary of Energy
• United States Department of the Interior, Ryan Zinke, United States Secretary of the Interior
• United States Department of Transportation, Elaine Chao, United States Secretary of Transportation
• United States Department of Agriculture, Sonny Perdue, United States Secretary of Agriculture
• United States Department of Commerce, Wilbur Ross, United States Secretary of Commerce
• United States Department of Defense, Jim Mattis, United States Secretary of Defense
• United States Department of State, Mike Pompeo, United States Secretary of State
• United States Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency

Influence

The Juliana lawsuit was covered in two segments on the American television news program 60 Minutes. The case's plaintiffs were shown on the program on March 3, 2019, and an update about the case was broadcast on June 23, 2019.

In a case similar to Juliana, the Clean Air Council, based in Philadelphia, filed a lawsuit in 2017 on behalf of two minors against the federal government’s efforts to weaken the Clean Power Plan in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The case was assigned to Judge Paul S. Diamond, who dismissed it in February 2019 because the plaintiffs did not have a legal right to be involved. Judge Diamond noted that rulings in the Juliana case "contravened or ignored longstanding authority" and stated that the requested rulings would "make the Executive a subsidiary of the Judiciary."

In 2012, six Alaskan youths filed a lawsuit against the state of Alaska, using the public trust doctrine (which states that the state must protect public trust assets from harm). The Alaska Supreme Court dismissed the case in 2014, saying the issue was too general and should be decided by political branches, not the judiciary. In 2017, a revised lawsuit (Sinnok v. Alaska) involving 16 Alaskan youths, led by the same group, Our Children's Trust, was filed against Alaska for laws promoting fossil fuel development. This case was dismissed in 2018 by a trial judge, who wrote that the youths did not show how the state’s actions violated any legal duty. The dismissal was upheld by the Alaska Supreme Court in 2022.

On September 23, 2019, Greta Thunberg, who inspired the school strikes for climate movement, and 15 other children filed a legal complaint under the United Nations’ Convention on the Rights of the Child against five countries with high carbon emissions: Argentina, Brazil, France, Germany, and Turkey. The complaint claimed these countries’ unregulated emissions violate children’s rights and would require them to set binding emission limits. Thunberg previously supported the Juliana case in speaking events.

Nationwide gatherings in support of the case occurred in 2018, planned to coincide with the trial’s start.

In October 2019, 15 youths filed a lawsuit against the Canadian government, claiming its lack of climate action violated their rights to life, liberty, and equality. The lawsuit was dismissed in November 2020.

The lawsuit was featured in a documentary titled Youth v Gov, which began streaming on Netflix in April 2022.

A case similar to Juliana, Held v. Montana, argues harm under Montana’s state constitution. In 2023, a District Court ruled that the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), which prevented the state from considering greenhouse gas emissions, violated the plaintiffs’ right to a clean and healthful environment and was unconstitutional. Montana’s Attorney General will appeal this decision. Montana’s Supreme Court heard arguments about the case on July 10, 2024.