Legislators file brief in kids climate case - Ravalli Republic

Legislators file brief in kids climate case

Montana's legislative leaders filed a brief Thursday in support of the state in the climate trial that's pending before the state Supreme Court.

The amicus brief, filed by Senate President Jason Ellsworth, R-Hamilton, and House Speaker Matt Regier, R-Kalispell, expressed support for Gov. Greg Gianforte's administration in Held v. Montana and asks that the high court overturn the district court's decision.
Senate President Jason Ellsworth, R-Hamilton, and Speaker of the House Matt Regier, R-Kalispell, preside of a joint session of the Montana Senate and House of Representatives for the State of the State address on Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2023, in the state Capitol.

The case made international headlines this summer after District Court Judge Kathy Seeley ruled in favor of the more than a dozen Montana youths who sued the state.

Seeley ruled that the state is violating the plaintiffs' constitutional right to a “clean and healthful environment” by not accounting for greenhouse gas emissions and climate change impacts when granting permits under the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). The case came after the Legislature passed a statute barring agencies from considering the climate effects of fossil fuel project leases.

People are also reading…

This was a first-of-its-kind ruling in a nationwide effort to bring similar “children’s lawsuits” over climate change and energy projects.

The state appealed Seeley's decision to the Montana Supreme Court and the legislative brief is the most recent development in the proceedings.

The amicus brief, filed Thursday, asserts that combating climate change and making energy decisions is a task for the Legislature, not the courts.

"The judiciary's constitutional authority does not allow the district court to determine how the Legislature should provide for the promise of a 'clean and healthful environment,'" the brief reads. "The Legislature is entrusted to consider how these bills implement a constitutional directive. It is uniquely poised to understand and evaluate environmental laws, some of which intend to help fulfill the promise of a clean and healthful environment," the brief later continued.

But the founder of Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, Michael Gerrard, pushed back against that argument, saying "It is a function of Montana state courts to interpret and enforce the Montana Constitution."

The separation of powers argument is one that was also made by the defendants — Gianforte, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Environmental Quality and the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation — in its opening brief before the Supreme Court filed earlier this month.

"There is no doubt that many Montanans are understandably concerned about climate change," the state's opening brief read. "But addressing that issue is a matter to be addressed by the policymaking branches."

This is the first time since 2021 that the Legislature has involved itself in a court case, according to Kyle Schmauch, communications manager for the Senate Republicans.

In 2021, the legislature had to vote on a joint resolution while in session to get involved in a court case, but this past session, the body passed a law that allows legislative officers to get involved in court proceedings without voting on a resolution.

The Frontier Institute, a Montana-based nonprofit think tank, also filed an amicus brief in support of the state and it was co-signed by stakeholders like the Montana Mining Association, the Montana Coal Council, United Property Owners of Montana, Montana Taxpayers Association and more.

These parties also included the separation of powers argument in their brief.

“The real question raised by this case is what role the courts should play in developing public policies to address global climate change. The answer is none. These important public policy decisions should be made only by the people’s elected representatives in the political branches of government,” said President and CEO of the Frontier Institute Kendall Cotton.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs have roughly 20 days to file their opening brief with the Supreme Court.