Nearly a decade ago, the Juliana 21, a group of courageous young individuals, launched a groundbreaking constitutional climate lawsuit against the U.S. government. Their case, known as Juliana v. United States, asserts that the government’s continued investment in fossil fuels—despite knowledge of the resulting climate crisis—violates their fundamental rights. This pioneering legal challenge has not only brought attention to the youth perspective in climate advocacy but has also inspired similar successful human rights climate cases worldwide.
A Long and Challenging Battle
Since its inception, Juliana v. United States has faced unprecedented opposition from the government, making it one of the most contested cases in U.S. history involving a government defendant. The journey has been fraught with legal hurdles, but the resilience of the Juliana plaintiffs has kept the case in the spotlight.
On May 1, 2024, a significant setback occurred when a three-judge panel in the Ninth Circuit issued its seventh petition for a writ of mandamus against the Juliana case, instructing Judge Ann Aiken to dismiss the youths’ claims. This latest ruling marks a departure from prior decisions, as previous petitions had been rejected by other Ninth Circuit judges and the Supreme Court.
Concerns Over Judicial Integrity
The problem lies not only in the ruling itself but in the manner in which it was reached. The new three-judge panel appears to have disregarded established limits on their jurisdiction set forth by Congress and the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has established strict criteria for granting such extraordinary petitions, and critics argue that the Department of Justice (DOJ) did not meet these standards.
In an unusual move, the panel issued a three-page unpublished order, seemingly attempting to minimize media attention. This lack of transparency raises questions about the integrity of the judicial process.
Taking the Fight to SCOTUS
In response to this troubling decision, the Juliana 21 have escalated their legal battle by filing a petition to the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus. They seek to reverse the Ninth Circuit’s decision and restore the case to the district court, emphasizing that the integrity of the courts and our constitutional democracy is at stake.
This latest petition focuses on procedural fairness rather than the merits of the case or the plaintiffs’ standing. The Juliana plaintiffs also requested an extension from Justice Kagan to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court. Additionally, they sent a settlement letter to the Biden administration, urging it to engage in meaningful settlement discussions and end the DOJ’s aggressive litigation tactics.
A Growing Movement for Change
Support for the Juliana case continues to build. Nearly 350,000 individuals from across the U.S. and around the globe have signed petitions, organized by Avaaz and Friends of the Earth US, calling for an end to the DOJ’s opposition to the case. These petitions were co-delivered by prominent environmental advocates, including Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org, and Jerome Foster II, the youngest-ever White House Environmental Justice advisor. Their collective voices highlight a growing public demand for the case to proceed to trial.
Bill McKibben noted, “If you care about justice, you care about Juliana.” This sentiment underscores the case’s broader implications for democracy and the rule of law.
The Stakes for Future Generations
Our democracy is built on the principle of checks and balances among three branches of government, with the courts playing a critical role in interpreting the Constitution and safeguarding our rights. Today, the climate crisis poses the greatest threat to young Americans, and the government’s actions contribute significantly to this peril. The Juliana 21, lacking voting or economic power, have turned to the courts for justice.
If we allow procedural injustices, like those exhibited by the recent three-judge panel, to persist, we risk subjecting the fundamental rights of children to the whims of those in power. The fight for climate justice is not just about policy; it is about ensuring that future generations inherit a livable planet.
As the Juliana plaintiffs continue their battle, they remind us that the quest for justice and a sustainable climate is a collective responsibility. The time to act is now, and the stakes have never been higher.
Nearly ten years ago, the Juliana 21 brought a first-of-its-kind, youth-led constitutional climate lawsuit against the U.S. government, asserting the government’s continued investment in fossil fuels, despite knowledge it would create the climate crisis, violates their fundamental rights.
Since then, Juliana v. United States has inspired winning human rights climate cases globally. In the United States, it has faced more government opposition than any case in history where the U.S. government is a defendant.
Here’s what just happened:
On May 1, 2024, a three-judge panel in the Ninth Circuit granted the seventh petition for a writ of mandamus brought against Juliana in nearly ten years telling Judge Ann Aiken to end the youths’ case. The prior six petitions were all rejected by other Ninth Circuit judges and the Supreme Court.
And here’s the problem:
This new three-judge panel didn’t follow the rule of law. They flagrantly disregarded the limits Congress and the Supreme Court placed on their jurisdiction. SCOTUS itself set the threshold on granting this type of extraordinary petition and the DOJ didn’t meet it by a longshot. The panel also tried to keep it out of the headlines in a three-page unpublished order.
Yesterday, the Juliana 21 took it to SCOTUS
They filed their own petition to SCOTUS for a writ of mandamus to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse this egregious error and return the case to the district court—because the integrity of our courts and constitutional democracy depend on it.
This SCOTUS petition is not about the merits or the plaintiffs’ standing to bring their case. It’s about fair process.
The Juliana plaintiffs have also filed an application to Justice Kagan for an extension of time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court. On Wednesday, they sent a settlement letter to the Biden administration asking that it finally come to the table in meaningful settlement talks and end the extraordinary litigation tactics by the Justice Department.
We are not going to stop fighting for young people and future generations’ rights to a life-sustaining climate.
Support for Juliana
Nearly 350,000 intergenerational individuals from the U.S. and around the world have signed petitions, hosted by Avaaz and Friends of the Earth US, calling for an end to the DOJ’s opposition to Juliana. Co-delivered Wednesday by Bill McKibben, co-founder of 350.org and Third Act, and Jerome Foster II, youngest ever White House Environmental Justice advisor, these petitions underscore the growing public demand for the case to proceed to trial.
Quote from Bill McKibben
If you care about justice, you care about Juliana
Our democracy was built on three branches of government, so we’d have the courts—to interpret the Constitution and define and secure our rights as the world grows and changes around us.
Today, the climate crisis represents the greatest threat to young Americans’ lives and the U.S. government is driving the crisis. So, the Juliana 21, with no voting or economic power, went to the courts.
If we allow procedural injustice like the actions of this three-judge panel in the courts—if we allow unfair, and unequal application of the law—then children’s fundamental rights are subject only to the opinion of those most powerful.