In a landmark legal victory, young climate activists, represented by Our Children's Trust, won the first-ever constitutional climate trial in the U.S.. In Montana v. Held, the court declared the state's laws promoting fossil fuels were unconstitutional. One of the plaintiffs, Claire Vlases, and a lawyer who fought the case join Chris to discuss the landmark legal victory and the need for systemic solutions to address climate change.
Show notes from Chris:
It's hard to feel like the power to make the difference is in the hands of us when a lot of the politicians are a lot older, and it's easy to feel helpless in a situation like that, I think, and for a while I really did. But that's something that is so important about this Montana case and the decision of Judge Seely, because it's the first time in a really long time I've felt like the power is transferred back to the youth. And if I consue my government, and when so, can anyone ah fucked.
Welcome to Unfucking the Future. I'm Chris Turney. I'm a climate scientist, and in my line of work it's easy to get depressed by all the horrible news about the environment. But I still believe and in spite of all that, a better future is possible. And that's what this show is all about, finding positive solutions to unfuck the mess we're in. So let's get started.
Fucking the future.
I want to pitch you a movie idea. In rural Montana, a group of plucky teenagers are worried about the climate crisis. They uncover obscure language in the state constitution that requires the state to protect the environment. So what do they do. They band together and sue the government. The government fights back, claiming in court the climate change will actually be good for Montana when the dust settles. The kids win, and as a result, they set the scene for ending fossil fuel production in the state and saving the world from total climate armageddon. This might sound like a Hollywood fantasy, and it actually happened. The case was known as helld versus Montana.
And in Montana today a landmark court decision a judge siding with a group of young people who accuse the state of violating their rights by supporting fossil fuels.
That means that Montana must account for the climate impact of fossil fuel production when releasing permits to developers, and in effect, it could end fossil fuel pollution in the state full stop. And it's all thanks to a group of plaintiffs ages five to twenty two, who sued the government for their right to a fair, clean future. Pretty damn remarkable. Right today, we'll talk about how it all happened and how you too can sue your government and save the world in the process. To do that, we've got not one, but two remarkable guests today. The first is twenty year old Claire Vlasses. She's one of the plaintiffs in the Montana lawsuit, and she's joined by Nate Bellinger. He's one of the lawyers who worked on the case. Both of them are associated with a group called Our Children's Trust, for world only not for profit law firm representing young people and their legal right to a future free from fossil fuel pollution, which brings us back to Claire. Claire Flashes is among the many plaintiffs working with Our Children's Trust. Growing up in Bozeman, Montana, She's always been an outdoors kid. Her upbringing really does sound pretty dreamy.
I grew up in a little wild cabin next to a creek. I have a big vegetable garden and raised sheep and chickens and honey bees surrounded by months. It's beautiful. It's a really beautiful place to go up. Sometimes I would plant lake thousands of kale plants, and I have to go to the farmer's market and try and sell off all of it.
Some kids have a lemonade stand. Growing up, Claire had a kale stand.
But it worked out really well with my little sister and I started a farm stand selling our vegetables on the side of the road. It kind of moved up selling at farmers markets to a restaurants, that kind of.
Thing so growing up, But I mean that sounds in adyllic childhood. What was your first awareness of climate changing? When did you first become aware that our maybe things weren't how they should be.
I think the first time I actually became really aware of it was when I was in kindergarten. The river that flows by my house nearly flooded our house, and then the next year it was almost dry, and I think just seeing that and those changes made it feel really real. So then when I learned about it in school, it just backed up my already existing beliefs about how climate change can impact everyone.
And I understand you actually took action early on at middle school. Are you installing solar panels and the roof of your school? And so I can tell me a bit about that.
Sure, When I was in middle school, I wanted to do something to help the environment, and I had an independent study class, so I got to pick anything I wanted to do, and my school was going through a remodel right then, and I thought it would be appropriate to include solar panels as part of that design. So I presented the idea to my principal and he loved it and took me straight away to a meeting that day with the architects and contractors.
Claire was excited to talk of the builders, but in that meeting she got her first taste of the dream killing power of the establishment.
I presented the idea and it was not well received. It didn't seem feasible to to the you know, the real the people who know what they're talking about, because solar panels are pretty expensive and it was not in the budget. So they told me that unless I could raise hundreds of thousands of dollars that I could, you know, maybe find a new independent study project.
The adults assumed this would be the end of a conversation, no more silly chats with twelve year old about solar panels, but not for the first time, the underestimated Claire.
I figured that if cost was the issue, I would just raise the money myself. A seventh graders like the perfect person to raise money, because you have no idea how much one hundred and twenty thousand dollars actually is. So I figured, you know, it was doable, So yeah, I went. I started out pretty small, went to local businesses, set out little jars for people to donate their change. Had presented the idea to the school foundation and got their support along with some seed money to get started. I wrote a lot of grants, I gave a lot of talks, and eventually I met with community members who are were able to help me get to the finish line.
Okay, that's pretty awesome. Claire had done something nobody had thought possible, and now her school was going to be leading the way towards a clean energy future. Well not so fast. Claire actually couldn't install all these solar panels in her school, and that's because of a shitty little law in Montana.
There's a cap on how much kill hours of solar energy that you can put into the buyback grid. It's a bit complicated when you when I try to explain it, but it basically discourages large buildings to put more than fifty kilowatts on of solar panel arrays on it. So, even though that only covered about a quarter of my school's electricity, that's the month that we.
Did, which meant that even though the school had the space and the money and the solar panels to cover their electricity needs completely, they could only get twenty five percent.
It was hard. I raised enough money and then it had to get split up into other schools. I'm happy to help everywhere, but it's frustrating that it wasn't. You know, it wasn't because of me. It was because of my government.
It was an important lesson for Claire. The fossil fuel industry has built up its power over decades, influencing a government to enact policies and regulations that protect that power, which meant that if Claire was going to change the world, she'd have to stop by changing the laws.
After I finished my solar panel project in middle school, a lot of doors opened for me in the environmental circles. So I had an opportunity to help plan the city of Bozeman sustainability initiatives to help them meet the Paris Accord. I got to work with a lot of different nonprofits and beyond boards of certain nonprofits.
And then Claire found out about a group putting together a blockbuster lawsuit in her state.
And then when I heard about this case happening in Montana, it got kind of passed along to me, and I am imediately reached out to meet Our Children's Trust to see if I could be a part of it.
The cases that we work on, including in Montana, they're constitutional cases, they're not traditional environmental law cases.
That's Nate Ballinger from Our Children's Trust, very law firm but also an advocacy organization, and they have a fantastic strategy for deciding which case is to bring.
We are seeking systemic solutions to the climate crisis. So there are so many fossil fuel projects that are constantly being proposed. Sometimes we call it whack a mole. So what happens is, you know, one route for a pipeline, maybe it's blocked and then the pipeline is built somewhere else. Or a power plant is delayed based on some statutory victory, but then you know there's some delay and then it ends up being built later on. So there's just so many of these projects coming up, and there's so permise to challenge. We're trying to go after kind of that broad picture energy policy and planning that governments do and make sure that when they're doing that, they're taking into account the need to protect children and their futures and address the climate crisis, and that means we can't continue to permit fossil fuels.
The case Nate was working on in Montana was a perfect example of his strategy. It wasn't challenging some project or policy. It was taking on the state government itself, and it had the potential to be transformative. To give you a sense of how transformative, Nate sometimes compares the case to another US legal battle, Brown versus Board of Education, which is a pretty lofty comparison.
Brown versus Board of Education obviously was the first time where the courts declared that segregated school systems was unconstitutional and cannot continue.
You.
So again, in both situations, too, you have governments, you know, using the law to effectuate the harms. So in the segregation context, there were laws that required segregation, and in the fossil fuel cont contexts and climate context there are laws promoting fossil fuel. So both instances you have governments using the laws to affirmatively harm plaintiffs. At its core, there about protecting the constitutional rights of children and youth.
This connection to Brown versus Board of Education wasn't just philosophical nat and his team studied the decision and they modeled that case after it.
You know, Brown versus Board of Education.
The Supreme Court decision gets a lot of the attention, but underlying that decision were trial court decisions from several states, and we went back and we read through those trial court decisions. We looked at the evidence presented in trial courts, and a lot of that evidence is the same type of evidence that we ended up presenting in our trial. And so, for example, in Brown versus Board of Education, they presented evidence about the psychological harms to children from going to segregated schools, and in the Montana trial, we presented evidence both from the plaintiffs themselves but also through a psychiatrist about the harms to children from having to live with climate disasters and having to live where your government is affirmatively promoting fossil fuels. We looked to constitutional precedent, including the segregation context, to figure out how to build the constitutional cases, what type of evidence we need to present at trial, and looking to the segregation cases has certainly been a part of that.
In June twenty twenty three, our Children's Trust made their case to the court.
We're fucking the future. Weird fucking the future.
This was the first ever constitutional climate trial in US history, and as part of that trial, we had twelve of the sixteen plaintiffs testify, and we also had ten experts testifying court, which is really really incredible.
Wow wow, now, Claire, you must were you nervous testifying? What was it like being up there on the stand?
Oh my gosh. Yeah, I mean I was nervous because I knew how many people were listening and how important it was. But I also wasn't nervous because or at least not too nervous because I knew everything. I mean, it's just the truth, right.
Claire drew support from her fellow plaintiffs. They were kids from across Montana and they all had a shared passion for the environment.
Everyone is so incredible. I got to know everyone at trial very well, and yeah, everyone has really incredible stories. One that stood out to me was the story of sorry El. She's Native American and her indigenous community relies a lot on oral traditions and storytelling, and a lot of big ones are related to when snow falls and stuff like that, and when there's less and less snow falling that oral tradition can become lost.
I want to pause on that because this was an interesting point made in the trial, and it brings us to a segment we like to call what the fuck are you talking about?
What the fuck are you talking about?
Soil? Sandoval is a young woman who identifies as Salish for Silish of indigenous peoples in North America who share a common language Slish. When soil testified in the case, she reminded the corp but the term also literally means flesh and land. In other words, the Salish peoples and their cultures are tied to the landscapes around them. For example, Sorrel says. But the creation stories how people tell can only be told when there is snow on the ground. Here's a clip of us speaking about it.
We have creation stories, coyote stories that are told during the winter when snow is on the ground. And because of climate change, that time that snow is on the ground has become much much smaller, like a smaller interval, So it's become harder and harder to tell these stories. But it's really important because these stories they tell us who we are as Salish people, and they tell us our morals and our history and how we came upon this land, and so being able to share that with our community, with our children is very important, and not being able to do that every year is really really hard.
When I talked with Sabrina Albert about cultural arraga because of obal heating, this is precisely what she was talking about. Indigenous communities risk losing a crucial part of their identity as the environment random changes. So that's what the fuck we're talking about.
What the fuck are you're talking about?
Okay, back to Claren Nate. After youth plaintiffs presented their case to the court, it was a stage turn and their approach was pretty shocking.
You know.
One surprise, I guess you could say, came towards the end of our case. So the way the trial work is, we presented our case for one week, the plaintiffs and our experts testified, and then the State of Montana had an opportunity to present their case and they were given a week also to present their case, and they ended up taking about two hours to present their case, and so we were a little bit surprised by how brief their case was and they had basically no expert testimony to contradict any of our scientists or any of our experts that testified. They didn't question any of our plaintiff's testimony. And the fact that the State of Montana didn't dispute any of our testimony was a little bit of a surprise, but I think it also underscores the strength of that testimony. At this point in time, twenty twenty three, in the midst of a climate crisis that gets worse every year, there is no justification for fossil fuels any longer.
You know.
The state had an opportunity to present evidence in terms of why it matters, why it matters for their economy, why it matters for their citizens, and they had no evidence to present.
Maybe the state didn't really take the lawsuit seriously. Maybe they assumed that there was no way the kids could win. Well, if that, well, it's the case. They were in for a rude awakening. In August twenty twenty three, the Judge Mato ruling.
I'm Kylie Gibson, our top stories We come on the air live at five.
Montana judge sided with young environmental activists on Monday, and first of its kind climate change trial.
Judge Kathy Seeley handed down her decision.
They won.
For those of you just rejoining us, we've been exploring the landmark court case in Montana where young climate activists challenged the state's promotion of fossil fuels and won. It was a historic legal victory.
This decision that we secured in August was the first time in our nation's history where courts have reviewed the constitutionality of government laws and conduct that promote fossil fuels, and after conducting that review, determined that they were unconstitutional, that it's unconstitutional for the state of mind Montana to have laws on the book that promote fossil fuels, prohibit the state from considering the impacts of fossil fuels, and declared that those fossil fuel policies and conduct is violating the constitutional rights of Montana's youth. We've never had a decision like that in our nation's history, so it's a really landmark decision.
Wow. So just to be clear, that's the first time that the US has actually upheld a constitutional right to be protected from climate change, that's right. Yeah, So what does that mean for Montana moving forward? I mean, how will the state have to change how it does business.
Yeah, well, there's a few things that it means, and the court's August order really spelled out what is unconstitutional. And one thing that the Court made clear is that today, right now, at the current levels of greenhouse gas emissions and the atmosphere and the current levels of fossil fuel extraction and production in Montana, that is unconstitutional. So what that means is the state not only can't continue to exacerbate their harms by further promoting fossil fuels, but they actually need to start to transition away from fossil fuels and eventually decarbonize their entire energy system. And we had evidence at trial about how Montana can do that. By twenty thirty five at the earliest, and no later than twenty fifty, they can get one hundred percent of their energy from renewable energy sources. So that's really the end goal here.
It's an ambitious goal, but of a moment it seems totally possible. The bigger question now is whether our Children's Trust can compete this success. The hope is to win more court cases like Visa in other states.
It was the first trial, the first win, but we think there will be more. We're constantly working on new cases. There's our federal case Juliana the United States, which has a long procedural history, but the current status is we're back on track and hoping to have a trial there in twenty twenty four sometime.
That case Nate is talking about, Juliana Versity United States. It's a big deal because it's not just taking on the state, it's taking on the federal government.
The main difference from the Juliana case is that case is based on the Federal Constitution, and so there are claims in Juliana under the Fifth Amendment, which protects the right to life, liberty, and property, and to ego protection of law.
If you'd like to learn more about it, Netflix has an incredible documentary called You Feegov. It's an emotional rollercoaster. Here's a clip from Betrayer.
It's all been a matter of choices, and our feelings of despair and dread and anxiety is all because of choices that we had no participation in.
And so it's based on the Federal Constitution, and it goes after the federal government's policy of promoting fossil fuels for at least the last fifty years, and we have evidence in that case that the government has known of the dangers of fossil fuels since the nineteen sixties and they were warning about the catastrophic harms it would result if we continue to this fossil fuel energy system. And we've built this incredible record of how every government administration since then has continued to promote fossil fuels and increase emissions. And we're hoping that we'll get to trial sometime the next year.
I think one thing that really struck me watching the movie. I think it's one of the plaintiffs, Nick Venner. Towards the end of the film, the team will sitting together and these reflecting on though we're still in not yet at court, but maybe the path we've chidden will help others even if the worst does come to pass.
We can be the foundations for a lot of other legal cases, and more importantly, we can show how the current system is broken and the possible ways can be proved.
It can be a beacon of hope to others.
The stories of Juliana versus US and Hell versus Montana are so inspiring. These young people from across the US are standing up against their government and winning. They're taking the lead on climate action instead of waiting for lawmakers to act, although it doesn't mean that those lawmakers are off the hook.
So again, it speaks to that systemic solutions to climate change that we need. We need all three branches of government, and we need all levels of government too. We need the federal government, we need the states, and we need local governments all working together on this.
And I to stand correct, the federal government's really fighting this case. That's just surprised me because the Biden administration seems to be so much more climate friendly than previous administrations. Why doesn't the government want this to go to trial.
Yeah, unfortunately, we're seeing a lot of the same litigation tactics from the Biden administration as we saw under the Trump administration, really fighting this case, trying to prevent the case from going to trial, which is really disappointing. I think the reason why they don't want the case to go to trial. You know, in some ways you can see what happens at trial in Montana that you put the government in a position where they have to try and justify their conduct. And you know, like the Biden administration, a lot of the things. You hear them say, they sound good, but when you get into court and you're looking at their conduct, they don't always align. So they might say they care about climlimate change, but their conduct shows otherwise. And trial is an opportunity to kind of peel back the layers of what they're saying in you know, press statements and actually look at the conduct.
And I think they don't want that to come to light.
They don't want all the evidence to come out about how they've known about the dangers of climate change for decades and yet continue to promote fossil fuels. And that's true across different administrations.
Wherever Our Children's Trust wins their case against the federal government, but work Claire and Native done in Montana has established a terrifically important precedent, both in the US and around the world.
One thing that the judge made clear in Montana is that you need a stable climate system in order to enjoy your basic constitutional rights, including your right to safety, health and happiness, your right to life, liberty, and property, individual dignity, including as well as your right to a clean and healthful environment. But that stable climate system is necessary to the preservation of these other constitutional rights. So the Montana wind is a really important precedent and roadmap, I think, even in states that don't have an explicit right to a clean and healthful environment.
And do you think we'll ever get to the point where burning fossil fuels is ruled unconstitutional?
Yeah, I think we could get to that point. You know, we were not advocating for an end of fossil fuels overnight. You know, the experts that we work with and the evidence that we've presented, you know, calls for a phase out of fossil fuels, and so we understand that this can't happen overnight, but you know, sometime within the next you know, twenty five years or so, we have the potential to have all of our energy coming from renewable energy sources. And that's necessary in order to protect protect our futures, protect the right of today's children, future generations. I think it's important to remember that people don't need fossil fuels. People need a way to turn on their lights, to heat their homes, to power their transportation, and there's other ways to do that without fossil fuels, and that technology is available today. And just as we've done in the past with other dangerous and harmful products. I think, you know, we can move away from fossil fuels and ultimately have them become illegal.
We're fucking the future. We're fucking the future.
So at this point you might be saying to yourself, this is amazing. I wish I could sue my government and help bring the fossil fuel era to an end. Well, here's the good news. You can. Our Children's Trust is constantly on the lookout for people willing to tell their stories in court.
So if anybody wants to get involved, there's a form that you can fill out on our website for youth in particular, a client intake form. So tell us where you are, a little bit about why you're interested in getting involved, and we'll get back to you. For anybody else that wants to, you know, keep up to speed on the case developments. You can go to our website it's Our Children's Trust dot org, and you know, sign up for our newsletter. We send regular case updates, and you know, we work with an incredible network of supporters, you know, scientists, medical experts, experts and renewable energy transition. So there's ways for just about anybody to get involved, So feel free to reach out and we'd love to hear from you if you want to find a way to support the cases.
And for those people who are listening outside America, is that something else that you can help with or you can put people in contact or even help them start a case of their own.
This is definitely a global movement and we're working all over the globe, so we you know, we've supported cases and a number of different countries around the world and before international courts, so you know, we were definitely love to hear from people from from different countries as well.
That's awesome. And just to be clear, do you have to be young? I mean certain middle aged scientists is out there interested in suing a government? Is that something else that's possibility? I might have a plenty for you if that's.
The well, all of our plaintiffs are our youth.
But there's always a way to get scientists and other experts involved in supporting the cases.
Okay, so maybe not all of us can join a landmark legal case. But that said, it's important to remember how ended up here. She got her start in climate activism. Guess solar panels installed at a School, and that's the kind of project anyone can get involved in.
I think everyone has a different capacity for making change, or for advocacy or pursuing their passion, And even if it's something really small, like really small, I think that's really important. And I mean we all have different capacities for doing that, and you know, even at different times. So as long as people are maximizing all that they can do at this given time, I think that's all you can really ask for.
And that brings us to the last segment of the episode. It's called what the Fuck Can I Do?
What the fuck.
Can I do?
As you probably know by now, this is a time where we focus on one specific thing you can do to help in the fight against global heating, And as always, we're joined by our friend Maggie Baird. Maggie, what did you think of a story of Claire and Nate in our Children's Trust?
When Clear School told her solar panels were too expensive?
What does she do?
She went out and raised the money herself. I really admire how she just kept going whenever she met an obstacle, and we can all learn from that example. The fossil fuel companies spend millions of dollars on lawyers and lobbyists. They understand how important it is to influence the law and the lawmakers, and we need to even the playing field.
So what the fuck can we do to level this playing field?
Well, in this case, the easy and obvious answer is to support the work of Our Children's Trust. Unfortunately, they have a lot of amazing ways to do that even if you don't have money. For example, if you're a lawyer like Nate, you can volunteer to provide pro bono legal work. If you're a student like Claire, they have great resources for you, like how to write a letter to your local.
Or school newspaper. They even have resources for teachers to help them teach about these issues in the classroom. Just go to Our Children's Trust dot org to learn how you can help.
Thanks, maggive 're just an incredible organization and making a real difference.
What fuck can I do?
Oh fuck?
Okay, that's all for this episode. Next time I'm Fucking the Future, we'll be speaking to psychologist doctor Lisa Van Sustron. She studies how a climate crisis is affecting our mental health. Spoiler alert is affecting us terribly, but even that may have a positive side effect.
Oh, it's even desirable, frankly to be outraged and angry. Many studies show that that is the prelude to taking action. That it is protective to be angry and outraged. They are healthy emotions to an unhealthy.
Condition until then. I'm Chris Turney signing off from Sydney, Australia. Thanks for joining me and I'm Fucking the Future.
Weird Fucking the Future.
I'm Fucking the Future is produced by Imagine Audio and Awfully Nice for iHeart Podcasts and hosted by me Chris Turney. The show is written by Meredith Bryan. I'm Fucking the Future is produced by Amber von Schassen and Renee Colvert. Ron Howard, Brian Grazer, Carral Welker and Nathan Chloke are the executive producers from Imagine Audio. Jesse Burton and Katie Hodges are the executive producers from Awfully Nice. Sound design and mixing by Evan Arnette, original music by Lilly Hayden and producing services by Peter McGuigan. Sam Swinnerton wrote our theme and all those fun jingles. If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to rate and review I'm fucking the future on Apple podcasts or whether you get your podcasts