By Ella Prieto, Managing/News Editor
On Monday, the Public Policy & Environmental Studies Departments hosted Rikki Held via Zoom in Mara Auditorium. Held is the Chief Plaintiff in Held v. Montana, the first successful U.S. Youth Climate lawsuit to support the right to a clean environment.
Held, whose twin brother attended Gettysburg College, resides on a ranch in Montana that has dealt with the effects of climate change firsthand. This has included droughts, wildfires, air quality, water variability, extreme weather events and more. Due to those experiences, she joined the case at 18 years old and was named as chief plaintiff since she was the oldest.
After being introduced by Environmental Studies Professor Irene Hawkins, Held explained case details through a PowerPoint presentation. She shared that it was overseen by the organization Our Children’s Trust, a non-profit public interest law firm that specializes in safe climate cases. The Trust, along with Held and 15 other plaintiffs aged two to eighteen years old, argued that the state had violated Article IX, Section 1 of the Montana Constitution, which reads, “That state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations.”
Held v. Montana is the first constitutional climate lawsuit and the first Youth Climate lawsuit to go to trial in the United States, adding to its significance. As a plaintiff, Held and the others gathered evidence, gave a deposition and participated in media coverage for the case.
“So in the lead up to trial we were gathering evidence, and as plaintiffs, our part was to tell our stories,” said Held. “So I told some of the impacts my family had experienced with our ranch and also our motels in town that had been affected by wildfires, flooding, and air pollution.”
The trial was held from June 12 to June 20 of this past summer. The plaintiffs testified along with various experts, such as 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention Delegate Mae Nan Ellingson, Nobel Peace Prize winner and climate scientist Dr. Steven Running, Montana pediatrician Dr. Lori Byron and expert on indigenous issues and Crow Tribe member Shane Doyle.
“We got to tell our stories to the judge and then also experts in climate science shared how that impacted our physical health,” Held said.
She praised all of the experts, saying, “All of these people were incredible, and I didn’t know how the trial would go, but it was just amazing. It covered so many topics and just showed this holistic picture of the climate crisis and what this means for our societies.”
Next, Held explained what the plaintiffs were asking from the state: a constitutional declaration of the fundamental right to a stable climate, a declaration that Montana is violating that right, a declaration that a provision in the Montana Environmental Policy Act violates fundamental constitutional rights, a stable climate system that consists of 350 parts per million of CO2 and a transition to a cleaner, healthier, renewable energy system.
Part of the trial was dedicated to how these requests could be accomplished. Director of the Atmosphere and Energy Program at Stanford University Dr. Mark Jacobson created a road map of transitioning to wind, water, and solar power from fossil fuels. He highlighted how doing so would save the United States billions of dollars and would also save on social costs, including people’s health and having to rebuild from wildfires.
Held also discussed how close the Powder River Basin, the largest coal deposit in the world, is to her home.
“I thought this was interesting because this is where I’m from, and we do not have the opportunity to move away from this… This is a place where the decisions are important for the future because we have control over this coal deposit and what’s going to happen… that affects air pollution and things like that,” said Held.
She tied this into one of Montana’s points in court: how much did their actions truly matter as only one state in one country of the world.
“I think it’s important for us to take responsibility for our actions when they are harming people,” said Held. “And we can influence other places, and that has to start somewhere.”
Finally, Held discussed what the ruling was from the court. Judge Kathy Seely ruled that Montanans have a constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment and other fundamental constitutional rights including our rights to dignity, health, safety and happiness; equal protection under the law; and public trust. Seely also ruled that Montana must consider greenhouse gas emissions and climate change when issuing fossil fuel permits. Montana must get the concentration of CO2 down to 350 parts per million and should prompt a transition to renewable energy sources.
“So this was an incredible ruling. And this will have a big impact on our state and then also influence other court cases going forward,” said Held. She highlighted a few of those cases, such as Juliana v. United States and Demanda Generaciones Futuras v. Minambiente in Colombia.
Next, the floor was opened for questions from the audience.
One student asked how a two-year-old, who was the youngest plaintiff, joined the case. Held explained that their parents ultimately made the decision for them, but they represented that age group and specific health concerns.
Another student inquired how Held believes Montana’s economy will be affected by the state moving away from fossil fuels. Held cited the roadmap by Dr. Jacobson as a possible way the economy could exist with new regulations. She also stressed that renewable energies would help groups in Montana, such as ranches, put money back into their pockets as technology like solar panels are cost effective.
It was then asked if Held felt that the lawsuit could be replicable in other states or with the federal government. She said that with the precedent of this case, other lawsuits could now be more successful, so it could be replicable.
When asked about how she dealt with misinformation about climate change, Held said she tends not to engage with it.
“People have made a lot of claims that just aren’t true or don’t really have substance. And so I guess we just kind of ignored those things because we know that they’re not listening,” explained Held.
The final question was why Held chose to go with Our Children’s Trust on the case. Held shared that a personal friend had told her about them, and when she met with the organization she saw that they were genuine and that the case was strong.
Held ended her presentation with final advice for the audience.
“Wherever you’re at in life, whether you’re just a young person and not in a position of power yet, and whether your interest is writing or art, or journalism or science, or education, or being a judge or a lawyer or a politician. Those are all needed and everyone has different interests. We need all those aspects of our humanity to move forward,” said Held. “Just do actions that match your values and what you want to see in the world we share.”
(Editor’s Note: This article was edited at 4:03 p.m. on September 5, 2023 to correct a misspelling of Rikki Held’s name. – L. Franchetti)
