Eighteen California children accused of intentionally discriminating against minors in the United States’ climate policies appeared in federal court this week historical case In danger.
Children, age 8 to 17 years, Sued the US government and the federal Environmental Protection Agency for violating his constitutional rights, Their lawyers claim that the country’s environmental policies have allowed dangerous levels of greenhouse gases to be released and accumulated in the atmosphere, despite knowing that these emissions would jeopardize their well-being and future.
Although younger generations will undoubtedly experience the worst effects of global warming, children have little, if any, recourse to influence the rules that will shape their future.
“Their only solution is not the ballot box, elections or political power,” said Julia Olson, an attorney for Our Children Trust, an Oregon-based nonprofit that filed the legal action. Climate change In many states.
But lawyers for the US Justice Department this week filed a petition to fire a federal judge in California trial, Partly arguing that the court does not have the authority to make sweeping public policy changes.
Judge Michael Fitzgerald, 64, acknowledged that climate change will have a profound impact on all Americans, especially those “who are my age or younger than the president.” But Fitzgerald, who did not rule Monday, said he sided with the government, saying those decisions should rest with Congress and the executive branch.
“There are so many ways that everyone can express their political views,” said Fitzgerald, who added that he volunteered for an elected official as a child.
In the coming weeks, Fitzgerald will issue a ruling on whether the case can proceed to trial. Ironically, in a case decided on children’s rights, the 18 plaintiffs – who live in communities that have been devastated by wildfires, floods or heat waves – remained silent in the courtroom on Monday.
However, outside the downtown Los Angeles courthouse, the children and their lawyers expressed their desire to be heard.
That includes 17-year-old Genesis B. of Long Beach, whose family doesn’t have air conditioning. he has experienced summer temperature so hot That she waits until sunset to start homework. By then, she is usually tired and dehydrated.
Genesis said he hopes Fitzgerald will let the case move forward, as he feels this suit is his best chance to make change.
“I would just ask to keep future generations in mind, because this is a planet for everyone,” she said. “One quote I would share with the judge is: ‘We do not inherit the Earth from our ancestors – we borrow it from our children.'”
Julia Olson, attorney for Our Children’s Trust, said, “When the EPA looks at the value of life, it does not consider a child’s life to be as valuable (as the life of an adult) because they are not income earners.” An Oregon-based nonprofit that has filed legal actions over climate change in several states.
(Denia Maxwell/Los Angeles Times)
According to Olson, a core argument of their lawsuit is that the EPA’s analysis of air pollution and greenhouse gases values the lives of adults as more valuable than those of children.
“When the EPA looks at the value of life, it doesn’t consider a child’s life to be as valuable because they’re not an income earner,” Olson said outside court. “All that economic analysis drives government decisions about whether to control or allow pollution. And if it’s cheaper to allow it, they’ll keep allowing it.”
Federal lawyers argued that no court decision would be able to repair past damage from climate change.
But the children and their lawyers argued that the case is also about minimizing future harm.
“It doesn’t automatically fix the damage,” said Maryam A., 13, of Santa Monica. “But I think you, as government officials, should be able to protect all Americans regardless of age, gender, race or anything like that.
“The fact that you are dismissing our claims because we are children does not invalidate what is happening to us. And I think sometimes people don’t take kids sitting in court seriously. But we are also like other people.
To reduce the level of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere this century, the plaintiffs argue that the U.S. government must stop burning fossil fuels by 2050. The Biden administration has set a lofty goal of completely eliminating the country’s carbon footprint by 2050However, achieving that goal will require decades of concerted policy action for the nation.
Meanwhile, the US and other countries are enduring record-setting heat, wildfires and powerful storms.
Avro S., a 14-year-old student from Palo Alto, said his middle school lost power due to extreme storms and flooding and had to evacuate. For him and the other plaintiffs, these recurring natural disasters further reinforced the importance of their case.
“Indifference is not the answer. There is action,” he said. “If climate change wasn’t happening, I wouldn’t be here. I would rather hang out with my friends or in school.”
