SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
September, 03 2020, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Global Communications Director: global-comms@350.org
Portuguese Young People File Ground-Breaking Climate Case Against 33 Countries With European Court of Human Rights
Six youth-applicants exposed to spiraling heat extremes bring first of kind climate case to Strasbourg Court.
OAKLAND, California
Four children and two young adults from Portugal have filed an unprecedented climate change case with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. They are asking the Court to hold 33 countries accountable for fueling the climate crisis. The case, which is brought with the support of the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN), centres on the rising threat which climate change poses to their lives and to their physical and mental wellbeing. If successful, the 33 countries would be legally bound, not only to ramp up emissions cuts, but also to tackle overseas contributions to climate change, including those of their multinational companies.
The filing of the case comes just after Portugal recorded its hottest July in ninety years. An expert report prepared for the case by Climate Analytics describes Portugal as a climate change "hotspot" which is set to endure increasingly deadly heat extremes. Four of the youth- applicants live in Leiria, one of the regions worst-hit by the devastating forest fires which killed over 120 people in 2017. The remaining two applicants reside in Lisbon where, during a heatwave in August 2018, a new temperature record of 440C was set. On the current path leading to about 3degC of warming, scientists have predicted that there will be a thirty-fold increase in deaths from heatwaves in Western Europe by the period 2071-2100.
The complaint alleges that the governments being sued are categorically failing to enact the deep and urgent emissions cuts required to safeguard the futures of the youth-applicants. Their lawyers cite the authoritative Climate Action Tracker which provides detailed ratings of countries' emissions reduction policies. Its ratings for the EU, the UK, Switzerland, Norway, Russia, Turkey and Ukraine--which cover the 33 countries being sued--show that their policies are too weak to meet the overall goal of the Paris Agreement.
Catarina Mota, one of the young adults behind the case, said: "It terrifies me to know that the record-breaking heatwaves we have endured are only just the beginning. With so little time left to stop this, we must do everything we can to force governments to properly protect us. This is why I'm bringing this case."
According to Gerry Liston, Legal Officer with GLAN: "This case is being filed at a time when European governments are planning to spend billions to restore economies hit by Covid-19. If they are serious about their legal obligations to prevent climate catastrophe, they will use this money to ensure a radical and rapid transition away from fossil fuels. For the EU specifically, this means committing to a minimum 65% emissions reduction target by 2030. There is no true recovery if it is not a green recovery."
Marc Willers QC of London's Garden Court Chambers, lead counsel in the case, said: "Human rights arguments have been at the centre of many of the recent climate change cases brought in domestic courts in Europe. But in many of those cases the courts have upheld clearly inadequate climate change policies as being compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. One of our aims in bringing this case is to encourage domestic courts to take decisions that force European governments into taking the action needed to address the climate emergency."
PRESS CONFERENCE
Location: online, register here to be added to our email list and receive press materials and access to the virtual press conference
Time: 11am (London/Lisbon Time, GMT +1), September 3rd 2020 Participants:
Six young applicants from Portugal (3 will speak*): Claudia Agostinho* (21), Catarina Mota* (20), Martim Agostinho (17), Sofia Oliveira* (15), Andre Oliveira (12), Mariana Agostinho (8)
Gerry Liston - Legal Officer, Global Legal Action Network Dr Gearoid O Cuinn - Director, Global Legal Action Network Marc Willers QC - Barrister, Garden Court Chambers, UK
Website: www.youth4climatejustice.org (goes live on September 3rd)
The Global Legal Action Network (GLAN) is a non-profit organisation that works to pursue innovative legal actions across borders to challenge powerful actors involved in human rights violations and systemic injustice by working with affected communities. GLAN has offices in the UK (London) and Ireland (Galway) | @glan_law | www.glanlaw.org. Media Contacts: Gerry Liston (Legal Officer) | gliston@glanlaw.org | +353863415175; Dr Gearoid O Cuinn (Director) | gocuinn@glanlaw.org | +447521203427
NOTES TO THE EDITOR
Four of the youth-applicants are from the Leiria region of Portugal, one of the regions worst- hit by forest fires which killed over 120 people in 2017. Scientists say that climate change was partially responsible for the scale of these fires. In 2017 GLAN began working with the youth- applicants to build a case following a successful international crowdfunding campaign.
A copy of the court application will be circulated in advance of the press conference to journalists who register their details on the above Google form. The case website will go live on the day of the press conference: www.youth4climatejustice.org
The countries being sued are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Croatia, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Latvia, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Turkey and Ukraine.
This case focuses on two main areas: how States contribute to global emissions inside and outside their borders. Regarding emissions released at home, European governments' reduction efforts are too weak and not in line with what the science demands.
Regarding emissions released outside their borders, it is argued that States must take responsibility for emissions relating to 1) fossil fuels which they export, 2) the production of goods which they import from abroad and 3) the overseas activities of multinationals headquartered within their jurisdictions.
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
LATEST NEWS
After Collins Says 'I Do Not Regret' Kavanaugh Vote That Led to Roe Reversal, Platner Responds: 'You Should'
The Maine Democrat has said that "in the years since Roe was overturned, Susan Collins has done everything she can to skirt responsibility and avoid accountability—from skipping hearings to avoiding town halls at all costs."
Jun 16, 2026
After Maine's Republican Sen. Susan Collins told a reporter on Tuesday that she does not regret voting to confirm US Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, despite the resulting reversal of Roe v. Wade, her Democratic challenger Graham Platner had a two-word response: "You should."
Noting that this is the five-term senator's first reelection campaign since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision overturned Roe, a journalist from News Center Maine asked Collins whether she regrets voting for Kavanaugh—who was accused of sexual misconduct during the confirmation process.
"I do not regret that vote," Collins said of confirming the right-wing justice, while also claiming that "I do disagree with Justice Kavanaugh's vote" in the Dobbs case.
Collins then tried to pivot, highlighting her votes for liberal justices and saying that the Dobbs decision "has not had an impact on the state of Maine," without mentioning that Democrats control both chambers of the state Legislature and the governor's seat.
Also responding to the video of Collins on social media Tuesday, Lauren French of the Senate Majority PAC, a political action committee dedicated to electing a Democratic majority in the chamber, said: "Unsurprising. Collins' abysmal abortion record goes far beyond Kavanaugh and Roe."
"She voted to confirm at least 19 anti-abortion Cabinet nominees and 43 anti-abortion federal judges, including nominees who explicitly support fetal personhood and called birth control 'abortifacients,'" French highlighted. "And just days after the Dobbs draft leak, Collins cast the deciding vote against the Women's Health Protection Act—a bill that would have codified Roe into law."
Throughout his campaign, Platner has repeatedly called out Collins for backing Kavanaugh, who has sided with the high court's right-wing supermajority on a range of issues, from abortion to voting rights. After an April decision with massive implications for future elections, he said: "Don't piss on our boots and tell us it's raining: Under their bullshit legalese, the far-right Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act today. Another disastrous decision brought to you by the court Susan Collins built, one terrible confirmation vote after another."
The following month, Platner took aim at the senator for not attending Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearings on reproductive healthcare, including abortion, post-Dobbs, declaring that "in the years since Roe was overturned, Susan Collins has done everything she can to skirt responsibility and avoid accountability—from skipping hearings to avoiding town halls at all costs."
"In November, Susan Collins will learn she can only run and hide from her damaging votes for so long. Because whether she knows it or not—her charade is over," added the oyster farmer and combat veteran, who has discussed his family's fertility struggles and the high costs of treatments during the campaign.
Platner's campaign has focused on not only how Collins has made life harder for Mainers and people across the country, but also his support for policies that would benefit the working class and challenge the oligarchs as well as the politicians they fund—including his Republican opponent, whose reelection bid has been backed by nearly 100 billionaires and their spouses.
As Common Dreams reported earlier Tuesday, amid a wave of new state-level restrictions after Dobbs, reproductive rights advocates have emphasized the economic impact of abortion bans—which, according to a new analysis by the Institute for Women's Policy Research, cost the US economy over $140 billion annually.
The Dobbs decisions and many others from the current court have fueled calls for change. Platner has argued that if his party reclaims control of Congress in the November midterms, there is a "compelling case" to impeach at least two justices—an apparent swipe at Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, right-wing ideologues who have faced ethics scandals in recent years.
Platner has further called for expanding the high court the next time Democrats control Congress and the White House—and stressed that in order to do so, "we need to elect people to the Senate who want to wield power like that, who understand that power matters, that it's real and you can use it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Elon Musk Should Have to Pay For This’: Trump Admin Says It Needs $1 Billion to Combat Screwworm
"Trump and Musk’s DOGE 'saved' $15 million by cutting a program dedicated to preventing the spread of screwworm," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal. "Now, there’s an outbreak infecting our beef and the administration is spending $1 billion."
Jun 16, 2026
When Elon Musk's "Department of Government Efficiency" took its chainsaw to the federal bureaucracy last year, it created bottlenecks that may have hampered the fight against the screwworm infestation currently menacing the southwest while making it much more expensive.
The annual US Department of Agriculture (USDA) spending to combat the flesh-eating insects only amounted to about $15 million per year. But along with about $382 million aimed at combating animal-borne illnesses around the globe, it was terminated in March 2025 as part of DOGE's effort to root out what it described as government "waste."
But now, with the pests bearing down on Texas and New Mexico, and at least 12 infections already identified in the US as of Tuesday, the Trump administration is spending at least $1 billion to fight the outbreak.
Brooke Rollins last November: We have screwworm under control south of the border. Beef prices will come down by spring 2026.
(The screwworm has just been detected in Texas for the first time in 60 years) pic.twitter.com/ozXdI88jXk
— FactPost (@factpostnews) June 4, 2026
Last week, during a Senate hearing, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins attempted to shift blame for the screwworm outbreak onto the Biden administration, while portraying herself and President Donald Trump as proactive in response to reports last spring that the insects were rapidly climbing through Central America.
Rollins said she asked Trump for "$1 billion to build a significant facility" in Texas that would breed hundreds of millions of sterilized male screwworm flies, a method that had been used to keep them contained in South America for decades. "Without hesitation, a couple questions, he said, ‘go.’”
That facility is expected to release around 300 million sterile flies per week. But it is not expected to be fully operational until the end of 2027.
In addition to the $15 million cut to monitoring the spread of the bugs from Panama, the Houston Chronicle reported that DOGE paused plans for a facility in Mexico that the Biden administration had authorized in 2024 as part of a $165 million emergency package to fight screwworm.
Amid mass layoffs at the USDA, it reported that funding for the facility—which was supposed to produce between 60-100 million sterile flies per week—was not announced until May 2025.
While the USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) still says fly production at the facility is expected to begin "as early as summer 2026," it is still listed as "under construction."
Kevin Shea, who served as administrator of APHIS under the Obama administration and retired from the agency in January 2025, told the Chronicle that efforts to contain the screwworm were put on hold at the start of Trump's second term.
“This administration came in so skeptical of the career people, they didn’t really want to listen,” he said. “The hold up in the money going to Mexico for the sterile fly facility was most likely caught up in the whole DOGE thing. It probably looked like some sort of foreign aid.”
Journalist Christopher Collins wrote in the Texas Observer on Tuesday that, additionally, “deep staffing cuts" to APHIS, which lost nearly 1,900 employees during Trump's first year back in office, eliminated "the first line of defense against incoming parasites," who are responsible for "inspecting the cattle awaiting import from Mexico to ensure no screwworms are hitching a ride."
Not joking but @elonmusk should have to pay for this right?
You broke it, why do we all have to pay for it? https://t.co/7SSgyuP0yr
— Ryan Grim (@ryangrim) June 16, 2026
As the spread of screwworm across cattle country threatens to further drive up beef prices that have already increased by over 20% since Trump returned to office, critics of the administration are seizing on it to highlight the failure of the president's so-called "efficiency" initiative, which—despite the grandeur of Musk's cost-cutting claims—ended up costing taxpayers an estimated $165 billion, according to an April 2026 report from the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) called the screwworm saga a prime example of DOGE's "peak incompetence."
"Trump and Musk’s DOGE 'saved' $15 million by cutting a program dedicated to preventing the spread of screwworm," she said. "Now, there’s an outbreak infecting our beef and the administration is spending $1 billion."
Reacting to the news that the government was spending at least $1 billion to confront the screwworm crisis, Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim wrote on social media, "Not joking but Elon Musk should have to pay for this right?"
"You broke it," he said, tagging the man who recently became the world's first trillionaire. "Why do we all have to pay for it?"
Keep ReadingShow Less
Abortion Bans Not Only Harm Patients, But Cost US Economy $140 Billion: Analysis
States that deny people's bodily autonomy limit "their ability to pursue the education and career options that are right for them, and to build financial stability," said the Institute for Women's Policy Research president.
Jun 16, 2026
Reproductive rights advocates and experts have long highlighted the dangers of abortion bans to people's health, but amid a wave of new state-level restrictions in the wake of Roe v. Wade's reversal, some have also recently emphasized the economic impact, as detailed in an analysis published Tuesday by the Institute for Women's Policy Research.
"IWPR's latest estimates show that states with the most restrictive abortion policies could cost the national economy nearly $68 billion annually in lost earnings, up from $64 billion in last year's estimate," according to the analysis. "Historically, legal abortion access has increased women's labor force participation and earnings. IWPR's analyses suggest that abortion restrictions continue to erode those gains nationwide, reducing women's labor force participation and earnings potential while weakening state and national economies in the process."
"Those losses—amounting to billions of dollars—could otherwise support what families actually need: affordable healthcare, caregiving, higher wages, business growth, and new jobs that strengthen local communities and state economies," the report notes. "This $68 billion estimate reflects only the impact of the most severe restrictions, including total bans and six-week gestational bans, that were in effect in 16 states in 2025."
The publication points out that "many other states may not have banned abortion outright, but still impose barriers that make abortion care harder to access, like waiting periods, mandated counseling, or targeted regulations on abortion providers that delay or deny care altogether. When accounting for all state-level restrictions on abortion access, combined with the federal funding prohibitions and the absence of federal protections, the annual average economic cost now exceeds $140 billion nationwide."
The overall figure is nearly $7 billion more than IWPR's estimate from last year. Putting that figure into context, the report explains that $7 billion "could fund Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for about 1 million American families with children for an entire year. This is a striking figure considering the so-called 'One Big Beautiful Bill's' cuts to the program, which are projected to reduce or eliminate benefits for many low-income households."
Removing barriers to reproductive care on a national scale "could mean nearly 325,000 more women participating in the labor force each year, with the largest increases concentrated in states with some of the most restrictive abortion policies," IWPR estimated. For example, in Alabama, Kentucky, and Louisiana, their labor force participation could be over 1.3% higher, while in Mississippi, it could be up 1.5%.
If more women joined the workforce thanks to policies allowing reproductive freedom, IWPR projected that "national gross domestic product (GDP) could rise by 0.5%, and the economic gains would be largest in states such as Alabama, Arkansas, South Carolina, and West Virginia, which rank poorly on both abortion protections and per capita GDP. These states could potentially see their GDP grow by nearly 1% annually."
Like previous analyses, the publication also acknowledges that "Black and Latina women are more likely to experience the consequences of restrictive abortion policies and confront additional economic and structural barriers to accessing care that their White counterparts do not—even as abortion restrictions harm all women and the economy more broadly."
IWPR president and CEO Jamila K. Taylor stressed in a Tuesday statement that "this is fundamentally about human rights and economic justice."
"We know that legal access to abortion care increases women's autonomy to be able to participate in the labor force, which supports the stability of our entire economy," Taylor said. "When states deny people their bodily autonomy, they're also limiting their ability to pursue the education and career options that are right for them and to build financial stability for their family and community. Abortion restrictions don't just harm those who may become pregnant—they harm everyone."
President Donald Trump delivered mixed messages during the last campaign cycle: bragging about being the one to appoint the justices who helped reverse Roe with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, but also suggesting that he wasn't in favor of a nationwide ban on abortion and that the issue doesn't really matter to Americans.
Since returning to the White House, the Republican and his allies in Congress have taken steps to reduce access to reproductive healthcare, and although the right-wing Supreme Court last month declined to restrict access to mifepristone, at least for now, Trump's Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is currently reviewing the medication, which is commonly used in abortion and miscarriage care.
Reproductive rights advocates have sounded the alarm over the FDA review. In response to reporting on it earlier this month, Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson called it "a politically motivated farce."
"Mifepristone is safe and effective. We know it, the FDA knows it, and the more than 7.5 million people who've used mifepristone for abortion and miscarriage care over the past 25 years know it too," Johnson said. "But the Trump administration is bulldozing the overwhelming body of medical research and evidence to try to make it harder for everyone, everywhere to get an abortion. It's time for every American to take this threat seriously."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular