Saying American children have a "fundamental right" to a "stable climate" and face a horrific future filled with little but dirty air and despair, a group of activists have filed suit against the U.S. EPA, ostensibly on behalf of a group of children, seeking a court order presumably forcing the EPA to more severely regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and other "climate pollution," without regard for economic harm to the country.
On Dec. 10, attorneys from environmental activist group Our Children's Trust, of Eugene, Oregon, filed suit in Los Angeles federal court on behalf of a group of teens and children from California.
The lawsuit specifically highlights many of the minors' ethnic identities.
The activists were joined in the action by attorneys from the Gregory Law Group, of Redwood City; the University of California at Irvine School of Law Civil Rights Litigation Clinic; and Schonbrun Seplow Harris Hoffman & Zeldes, of Hemosa Beach.
The lawsuit claims the teens have been traumatized by weather events and natural disasters in or near their communities. The lawsuit makes little effort to differentiate so-called "climate pollution," which they blame for rising temperatures and wild fires, among other alleged problems, from industrial pollution, which may dirty the air with soot or ash, or cause smog.
The lawsuit claims, for instance, that some of the children have suffered by living in non-air conditioned homes amid hotter summer temperatures, which they claim have caused their academic performance to suffer.
They claim ash from wildfires has created poor atmospheric conditions, which worsen breathing-related illnesses in people, particularly in children.
They claim the emissions has both created historic torrential rains, "extreme" snowfalls and "historic drought," fueling those wildfires, simultaneously.
Others claim they have had family vacations ruined by floods or other weather events, while others have been unable to enjoy California's beaches because "oil spills often run onto the beach."
Typically, the minor plaintiffs claim they are worried "about how (their) future will be affected by climate change and how much (they) will be able to go outside due to poor air quality."
They further express worries that California will run out of drinking water, because glaciers on mountains are melting and receding. At the same time, they say, rising sea levels will allegedly threaten California's coastal communities.
Warming temperatures allegedly further increase risks from mosquitos and other harmful insects, while increasing risks from various diseases.
The plaintiffs generally say they feel constant "despair" at the thought of living in a world in which the climate is changing.
One of the plaintiffs, identified as Maryam A., 13, a Muslim, of Santa Monica, noted she "also is concerned about her ability to participate in the Hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca that is done on foot, with increasing temperatures."
"Maryam believes that her generation, and all generations, are owed a future," the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit asserts the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has failed to live up to its mandates under federal law, because it takes into consideration impact to the national economy and society, as a whole, when crafting environmental regulations, rather than simply acting to reduce emissions to levels acceptable to environmental activists.
The lawsuit particularly cites to a 2009 Endangerment Finding for "climate pollution," issued by the U.S. EPA under former President Barack Obama, a Democrat.
That Endangerment Finding "stated that current and projected atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, in particular CO2, threatened the public health and welfare of current and future generations" through "worsening climate change."
The lawsuit claims the EPA has therefore been derelict in not taking severe action to eliminate the use of oil, natural gas and coal to address the alleged threats, no matter the potential economic catastrophe that might follow.
The lawsuit lands as the latest attempted class action pending in courts around the country, seeking to compel government action against carbon emissions and the so-called "fossil fuels" industry through the courts, and circumvent the democratic and legislative processes.
In Montana, for instance, a judge struck down a state law that had forbidden the state from considering "climate effects" when considering whether to permit new mines, oil wells and pipelines in the state. That lawsuit also was advanced on behalf of teens who claimed they despaired for their future because of climate change. One of the plaintiffs in that case notably claimed the state should consider the alleged effects to snowfall on ski slopes.
The California lawsuit rests largely on the assertion that the EPA's alleged failure to ensure climate stability violates children's constitutional rights to equal protection, because climate change harms their "ability to live and enjoy their lives by imposing on them significant risk of harm and a lifetime of hardship for matters beyond their control."