Yesterday, twenty-one of America’s children had another day in court, doing their best to save our planet from their elders.
Three years ago, these children sued the U.S. government, challenging policies and programs that facilitate industrial pollution. The children raised the novel legal argument that they have a Constitutional right to a livable planet.
As explained in a news release:
Juliana v. United States is not about the government’s failure to act on climate. Instead, the 21 young plaintiffs assert that the U.S. government, through its affirmative actions in creating a national energy system that cause climate change, has violated their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property, and has failed to protect essential public trust resources.
A month ago, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected attempts by the administration to silence the children by preventing their case from ever coming to trial.
Yesterday, the district court rejected more government requests for delay and set the trial to begin on October 29, 2018, just a week before the mid-term election.
To the likely dismay of climate change deniers, the Department of Justice has accepted reality and has conceded that most of the scientific claims underlying the childrens’ lawsuit are true.
Instead of challenging the science, which would be a stupid move, the current administration instead is prepared to argue that the Constitution permits our government to damage or destroy our planet’s ability to support life. Alternatively, the government plans to argue that the situation is hopeless, that nothing can be done, so that the children’s legal claims are not redressable.
Based on his attitudes toward the environment, as I previously discussed here and here, Tennessee Congressman Phil Roe might as well be a defendant in the childrens’ lawsuit. Not only has Roe been identified as a climate change denier, in his view, business interests and money routinely outweigh important environmental protection measures.
In contrast, Dr. Marty Olsen stands with the children. As the unopposed Democratic candidate who will face Roe in November’s election, Olsen’s values on the environment are straightforward and consistent with his campaign theme of Responsible Change:
People in the current generation should leave the world better than they found it, not worse than they found it.
The Earth is neither Republican nor Democrat. Respect and care for our environment cannot be a partisan issue, because protecting our planet is not a choice — it is a moral, even sacred, duty.
The people of East Tennessee’s First Congressional District will have a clear choice in November: elect a fresh candidate who stands for Mother Earth and for assuring a livable planet for our children and grandchildren, or vote once again for a sad incumbent whose misguided and short-sighted attitudes threaten to sacrifice our childrens’ right to inherit a livable planet on an altar built from corporate balance sheets and billionaire bank accounts.
I know what I’m going to do for our children. How about you?