{"id":372054,"date":"2025-03-26T08:19:37","date_gmt":"2025-03-26T07:19:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=372054"},"modified":"2025-03-26T08:19:39","modified_gmt":"2025-03-26T07:19:39","slug":"us-supreme-court-rejects-long-running-youth-climate-lawsuit","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=372054","title":{"rendered":"US Supreme Court Rejects Long Running Youth Climate Lawsuit"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Essay by<\/strong> Eric Worrall<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Bye bye Juliana v. United States<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

US Supreme Court will not hear novel youth-led climate change case<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Nate Raymond<\/a>
March 25, 202511:29 AM GMT+10<\/p>\n\n\n\n

March 24 (Reuters) \u2013 The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected a bid by 21 young people to revive a novel lawsuit claiming the U.S. government\u2019s energy policies violate their rights to be protected from climate change.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

\n

The justices denied a request by the youth activists to hear their appeal of a decision by the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals directing a federal judge in Oregon to dismiss the case<\/a> after holding they lacked legal standing to sue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2026<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe Supreme Court\u2019s decision today is not the end of the road and the impact of Juliana cannot be measured by the finality of this case alone,\u201d Julia Olson, a lawyer for the plaintiffs at Our Children\u2019s Trust, said in a statement.

\u2026Read more:\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/www.reuters.com\/legal\/us-supreme-court-will-not-hear-novel-youth-led-climate-change-case-2025-03-24\/<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The US Department of Justice issued the following press release;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Justice Department Statement on Juliana Case<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Monday, March 24, 2025<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari by plaintiffs in Juliana v. United States<\/em>, a case the Justice Department has consistently defended across three presidential administrations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The case, filed in 2015, sought to have courts force the government to implement more stringent, remedial measures related to climate change. The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon agreed to hear the case. The Justice Department moved to dismiss and sought an interlocutory appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit remanded the case to the district court with instructions to dismiss. The district court accepted an amended complaint, and the circuit court again instructed for the case to be dismissed. The plaintiffs then filed a petition for certiorari in the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cFor nearly a decade, lawyers for the plaintiffs in the Juliana<\/em> case have tied up the United States in litigation, persisting even after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals twice instructed the case to be dismissed because the plaintiffs lack Article III standing,\u201d said Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department\u2019s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD). \u201cThe U.S. Supreme Court\u2019s cert denial brings this long saga to a conclusion. Through ENRD\u2019s work, the Justice Department is enforcing our nation\u2019s environmental laws and safeguarding America\u2019s air, water, and natural resources. Cases like Juliana<\/em> distract from those enforcement efforts.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Updated March 24, 2025Read more:\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

https:\/\/www.justice.gov\/opa\/pr\/justice-department-statement-juliana-case<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

A Supreme Court Mandamus<\/a> Denied notice is available here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This has been a very long running saga.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
Climate Craziness of the Week: James Hansen is using children to sue US government over climate<\/a><\/blockquote>