October 1st, 2018
Written by - Margot Luria '20
On Monday, October 28, the trial for a lawsuit between environmental activists and the Trump Administration, known as Juliana vs. United States, is set to begin. The lawsuit under discussion has been filed by 21 individuals, all between the ages of 11 and 22, against the administration on account of perceived inactivity in the fight against climate change. This is a bold stand against Trump’s recent activities, considering the efforts that have been made to reverse and revise certain policies put in place by past administrations. The adolescents involved rest their claims on the “fundamental constitutional rights to freedom from deprivation of life, liberty, and property,” arguing that the imminent climate change leaves current and future generations to deal with catastrophic consequences and decreased quality of life a few decades down the road. This approach seems to be strengthened by their age, as the environmental changes that are expected to occur by the end of the century will not have as much effect on the lives of older generations.
Julia Olson will serve as the defense lawyer representing the environmental activists, and her non profit organization Our Children’s Trust is involved in similar legal cases around the country. Olson has only been actively working in the legal field since 2010, giving her what seems to be a relatively low experience level, especially for a case of this magnitude; Filing a lawsuit against the federal government is not a small endeavour. The case was originally filed against the Obama Administration for moving too slowly in taking action against the burning of fossil fuels, and the activists have since intensified their stand, claiming that “Obama was moving too slowly, and now Trump is moving backward.” After establishing roll backs on several Obama era policies that worked to reduce the production of environmentally harmful waste products, this “backwards moving” theory is proving itself to be true. The Trump Administration made efforts towards earning a dismissal of the case, arguing that the plaintiffs never “suffered a concrete, particular injury because of the actions of the defendant”- a requirement that must be met for the courts to be able to handle the case. However, the case continued to move forward in the court process, and the opening statements are now less than a week away. While the Trump Administration has made numerous notable efforts to scale back in the fight against climate change, giving the plaintiffs a solid motive behind their push for action, the circumstances and legal arguments being made by the federal administration does not leave much promise for a favorable result.
Comments