There Is More To The "Groundbreaking" Hawaii Climate Settlement Than You Might Think
The legal landscape is changing.

The law should protect us, our property, and our rights, right? That isn’t a contentious statement. But when it comes to climate change, which is man-made and damages our health, property and rights, it is suddenly incapable of stepping in. With climate change only set to get drastically worse over the coming years, even if we reach net-zero, this blind spot of the law is becoming an ever-pressing issue. But it is in the process of being reshaped, thanks to young activists.
How? Well, these young activists are taking their states to court and winning.
One of these groundbreaking cases recently hit the headlines when 13 children and teens sued the state of Hawaii. Their case claimed that the state had violated their rights by expanding and supporting industries and infrastructure that contribute to climate change. For example, the state had prioritised highway construction projects ahead of other solutions that would cut carbon emissions, such as trains or EV initiatives/infrastructure. The youngsters further argued that not only is there an immense carbon emission associated with building these highways, but they lock in future emissions, as the auto industry is still decades away from being carbon-neutral. The plaintiffs argued that this violated their rights to a clean and healthy environment and the Hawaii Constitution’s duty to “conserve and protect Hawaii’s natural beauty and all natural resources.”
To many, this might sound far from the most watertight of cases. What’s more, the state used a tried and tested defence. They argued that zero emissions targets were something to aim for but couldn’t form the basis of claiming the state violated the young people’s rights. This is a rehashing of an environmental destruction defence that has been successfully used over and over again by the fossil fuel industry.
You might think these kids had not a hope in hell of winning. In fact, the state defended itself fiercely, putting $3 million behind its legal team. How could a group of kids fight against that?
Well, they did, and they won! Not only that, but the state has agreed to drastically decarbonise its transport systems by 2045. Something they were already planning on doing, but that is now set in stone as part of these legal proceedings.
However, this case is far from isolated. A while ago, another group of 16 young climate activists took the state of Montana to court for similar reasons. Likewise, this resulted in a landmark ruling where the judge ruled that the state was violating their constitutional right to “a clean and healthful environment,” as well as their rights to dignity, health and safety, and equal protection of the law.
So, why is this so important?
Well, it sets a precedent.
Precedent is a core part of US law that ensures the law is applied equally across the nation and so that the law can shift to reflect a changing society. The idea is that a court decision is considered an authority for deciding subsequent cases involving identical or similar facts or similar legal issues. In other words, by winning these cases, these kids are reforming US law so it can hold states accountable for not caring for their environment.
Now, it’s not quite as simple as that. While these two cases won, not all of them have. For example, a recent case brought by young people against the Californian state that claimed the state issuing new oil licences violated their rights to a clean and healthy environment was thrown out by a judge. Cases like this muddy the waters of precedent.
But this is why cases like the one in Hawaii are so important. The more of them that come to court, and the more of them that win, the stronger the precedent is set that states can be sued for their climate negligence. As such, the law will gradually shift from protecting the billion-dollar assets of oil companies and the industries that thrive off their products over people’s rights to a healthy environment and instead function to protect you and me from ecological harm.
So, while this recent Hawaii case may only seem like a symbolic victory, what it actually represents is incredibly important.
Thanks for reading! Content like this doesn’t happen without your support. So, if you want to see more like this, don’t forget to Subscribe and help get the word out by hitting the share button below.
Sources: BBC, Reuters, Cornell Law University, UN, Reuters