July, 10 2024, 05:03pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Helen Britto, Our Children’s Trust, helen@ourchildrenstrust.org
Nate Bellinger, Our Children’s Trust, lead counsel, nate@ourchildrenstrust.org
Melissa Hornbein, Western Environmental Law Center, hornbein@westernlaw.org
Montana Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Landmark Youth-Led Constitutional Climate Case Held v. State of Montana
HELENA, Montana
Today, counsel for the 16 plaintiffs in the historic youth-led constitutional climate case, Held v. State of Montana, presented oral arguments before the Montana Supreme Court. In a packed courtroom, counsel for the plaintiffs argued to affirm the August 2023 ruling in favor of the plaintiffs from District Court Judge Kathy Seeley declaring that the State of Montana’s laws that require the State to turn a blind eye to young people’s climate injuries while promoting fossil fuel activities violate their constitutional rights to a clean and healthful environment, including a livable climate, their dignity, safety and equal protection of the law.
After Judge Seeley’s historic ruling, the state appealed the decision to the Montana Supreme Court. The court also filed for a stay in District Court asking the court to delay its decision on Held pending appeal. Judge Seeley denied the request for stay and the state Supreme Court denied a similar request to stay the District Court’s order.
Attorney for the plaintiffs Roger Sullivan of McGarvey Law today argued that the 16 young Montanans have personally suffered direct and severe impacts from climate change, supported by the unchallenged scientific expert testimony presented at trial. He asserted that the youth proved that they have suffered constitutional injuries to their unalienable rights including their physical health and safety, which is more than enough to establish that the Court has jurisdiction to review the statute at the heart of their climate injuries–a law that requires the State agencies to ignore those injuries entirely in regulating fossil fuel activities in Montana. In his arguments, Sullivan stated:
“This case is about Montana’s climate, Montana’s constitution, and Montana’s children. These courageous young Montanans who are present in the courtroom today testified about the impacts of extreme summer heat while working on the family ranch, about their inability to breathe clean air as a result of the new ‘smoke season,’ about maintaining ancient Tribal traditions tied to the seasons and the absence of winter snow, and about impacts to their cherished landscapes all across our state, from the grandeur of our mountains to the vastness of our rolling plains. Now before you is an unparalleled trial record with findings of fact based on testimony of the youth plaintiffs and Montana’s renowned climate scientists and medical professionals which established that the reason there is a constitutional injury is because the legislature told the state agencies that they could not look at the impacts on Montana’s climate of the fossil fuel activities they permit, and so the agencies haven’t, which is why the record shows they have never denied a fossil fuel permit. This record also shows we are in a climate emergency and additional greenhouse gas emissions will cause additional heating and additional injuries to plaintiffs.”
“With this case we are working to protect our state of Montana, our people, and our land because this is our home. It is our responsibility and moral obligation, along with that of the courts, to hold our government systems accountable in ensuring our most fundamental rights are protected,” said named plaintiff Rikki Held. “Our case, ruled on by Judge Seeley last year, has laid out the best available science on climate change and related health impacts especially to young people, has shown long-standing state action against the well-being of our state and our future, and has raised the voices of us young Montanans who have already experienced the results of our state government's actions contributing to the global climate crisis. I hope the Montana Supreme Court affirms Judge Seely's August order to ensure our constitutional rights, including the fundamental right to a livable climate, are protected and adhered to as we lay our path for the future.”
“The scale at which the State is suggesting State agencies operate, on a permit by permit basis, is not appropriate to the scale of the climate emergency. A decision in favor of Held plaintiffs would allow agencies the framework within which to make constitutionally compliant decisions, and position Montana to alter the systems that injure the youth plaintiffs. A safe, and livable climate is in all of our interests,” said Our Children’s Trust attorney Nate Bellinger. “The State should stop fighting Montana’s youth, stop prioritizing fossil fuel development over the best interests of its own residents, and get to work complying with the Held order. We thank the Court for hearing us today, and look forward to its ruling.”
The 16 youth plaintiffs in this case are represented by attorneys with Our Children’s Trust, the Western Environmental Law Center, and McGarvey Law.
About Held v. State of Montana:
In March of 2020, 16 youth from across Montana filed a constitutional climate suit against their state government. They asserted Montana’s support for the extraction, burning, and transport of fossil fuels ignored the facts of the climate crisis and violated their constitutional rights to a clean and healthful environment, dignity, safety, and equal protection of the law.
In a seven-day trial in June 2023, District Court Judge Kathy Seeley heard from 12 youth plaintiffs and 10 expert witnesses about how youth are harmed by their government’s laws that require agencies to ignore climate change while approving the use of fossil fuels, and what science requires to protect their fundamental rights. In August 2023, Judge Seeley ruled wholly in favor of the youth plaintiffs making Held v. State of Montana the nation’s first, winning, youth-led constitutional climate lawsuit and enshrining into law science-based protections for children’s fundamental rights. The State filed its appeal in September 2023 to the Montana Supreme Court.
At oral argument the Montana Supreme Court has the opportunity to listen to attorneys from both sides and review the trial court record.
Our Children's Trust is a nonprofit organization advocating for urgent emissions reductions on behalf of youth and future generations, who have the most to lose if emissions are not reduced. OCT is spearheading the international human rights and environmental TRUST Campaign to compel governments to safeguard the atmosphere as a "public trust" resource. We use law, film, and media to elevate their compelling voices. Our ultimate goal is for governments to adopt and implement enforceable science-based Climate Recovery Plans with annual emissions reductions to return to an atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration of 350 ppm.
LATEST NEWS
61% of Americans See Trump's Iran War as 'Mistake', Far Outpacing Disapproval of Vietnam and Iraq: Poll
"In Iraq, it took more than three years to reach that high. In Vietnam, it took six years."
May 01, 2026
More than 6 in 10 Americans now say President Donald Trump's war in Iran was a "mistake," according to a poll out Friday from the Washington Post/ABC News/Ipsos.
Within two months, the war—which has inflicted thousands of civilian deaths and caused gas prices to spike worldwide with little tangible gain—has reached levels of unpopularity that previous wars now seen as historic boondoggles took years to reach.
The Post has asked the "mistake" for other major wars. But CNN senior political reporter Aaron Blake explained: "In Iraq, it took more than three years to reach that high. In Vietnam, it took six years."
Despite a massive protest movement, voters overwhelmingly supported President George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq, with 81% believing it was the "right thing" in April 2003 and just 16% believing it was a mistake.
But the occupation turned into a long, deadly, and costly disaster, and the administration's pretexts for the war were revealed to be lies. Public opinion steadily eroded to the point where 64% viewed it as a mistake by January 2007.
Vietnam never had the overwhelming support of Iraq, but 60% of Americans still supported President Lyndon Johnson's decision to begin direct US military involvement in 1965, while just 24% said it was a mistake.
While the protest movement against the war is as present in Americans' memories today as the conflict itself, public opinion was still split until 1968 and only reached a high of 61% in May 1971, after more than 50,000 US soldiers had been killed in battle.
Trump's war in Iran is unique in history in that it never enjoyed even a moment of consensus support. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll just days after the opening salvo of what the Trump administration dubbed "Operation Epic Fury," just 27% said they approved of the strikes, which killed 555 Iranians, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several other top Iranian officials.
At this point, 43% of Americans already said they disapproved of the strikes, far eclipsing Iraq and Vietnam. But 30% still said they had not yet made up their minds.
In the coming months, they would. It was revealed that an airstrike on a school, which killed at least 155 people, including 120 children, was a double-tap attack by the United States. Iran retaliated by blocking oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, which sent US gas prices hurtling above $4 per gallon. And Trump took on an increasingly erratic and at times outright genocidal posture toward Iran that made any peaceful resolution appear increasingly impossible, even with the current fragile ceasefire.
Friday's poll shows that while the war still maintains a core base of support—36% of Americans who say it was the right decision, nearly all of them Republicans—it is dwarfed by the 61% who say it was a mistake.
Majorities of respondents across all demographics show that they believe the war has increased the risks of "terrorism against Americans" (61%), "the US economy going into a recession" (60%), and "weakening relationships with US allies." (56%)
Looking beneath the surface shows an even more worrying sign for Trump: The war has almost no constituency outside of his biggest fans. Self-identified Democrats (91%) overwhelmingly say the war was a mistake. But 71% of independents—many of whom were undecided at the war's outset—now disapprove too, with just 24% in support.
Even within the GOP, there is a decisive split: 86% of those who self-identify as "MAGA Republicans" are still baying for blood. But "non-MAGA Republicans" have grown uncertain—50% still say war was the right decision, while 49% say it was a mistake.
They were particularly rattled by Trump's threat last month that "a whole civilization will die tonight" if Iran did not negotiate a deal to his liking. The threat of genocide was too much even for the majority of Republicans, 53% of whom said they viewed it negatively.
What remains to be seen is whether even Trump's most faithful backers will turn against the war as it drags on. If Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's appearance in Congress on Thursday is any guide, the country may soon find out.
On Thursday, when Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) pressed Hegseth about why he has "not sought the support of the American people" and added that "3 out of 5 Americans are against this war today," he appeared in abject denial about the war's unpopularity.
"I believe we do have the support of the American people," he said. "I would remind you and this group that we're two months in to an effort, and many congressional Democrats want to declare defeat two months in."
He specifically invoked lengthy past conflicts, repeatedly emphasizing that this one had only lasted "two months," as if to urge patience with a war Trump had previously said was intended to last only "four to five weeks."
"Iraq took how many years? Afghanistan took how many years? And they were nebulous missions that people went along with," he said.
"This is different," he said of a war that has—depending on the day—been described as one aimed at regime change in Iran, defending protesters, destroying its nuclear program, eliminating its ballistic missile supply, taking its oil, defending Israel, and reopening the Strait of Hormuz, among other objectives.
Keep ReadingShow Less
May Day Demonstrations Worldwide Condemn US-Israeli War on Iran, Champion Workers
"Working people refuse to pay the price for Donald Trump’s war in the Middle East," said the European Trade Confederation.
May 01, 2026
May Day demonstrations across the world on Friday denounced the US-Israeli war against Iran, which has caused a global energy crisis that is disproportionately harming working-class people.
Among the earliest May Day demonstrations took place in the Philippines, and a video published by The Associated Press shows protesters clashing with police near the US Embassy in the capital city of Manila.
While many demonstrators held signs that referenced local issues, American foreign policy was also a major focus of the protesters, as marchers in Manila carried a large banner that read, "Down With US Imperialism."
Josua Mata, leader of the SENTRO umbrella group of labor federations, told The Associated Press that the war with Iran was a central focus of protests because of the impact it's had on energy costs.
"Every Filipino worker now is aware that the situation here is deeply connected to the global crisis," Mata explained.
Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto attended a May Day rally held in the capital of Jakarta, where Jakarta Globe reported that he announced a host of worker-friendly policies including plans "to build daycare facilities for workers’ children and accelerate the construction of at least 1 million homes."
France 24 reported that hundreds of demonstrators in Istanbul, Turkey were arrested after attempting to march to the city's iconic Taksim Square, which police had sealed off.
The Turkish Contemporary Lawyers’ Association (ÇHD) said on Friday afternoon that at least 350 demonstrators in Istanbul have been detained as a result of the protests, with hundreds more potentially in custody.
May Day demonstrations are also taking place across Europe, with many demonstrators blaming US President Donald Trump's war for the deterioration of workers' living standards.
The European Trade Union Confederation, which represents 93 trade union organizations in 41 European countries, released a statement declaring that "working people refuse to pay the price for Donald Trump’s war in the Middle East," adding that "today’s rallies show working people will not stand by and see their jobs and living standards destroyed."
Trump is also facing protests at home, with more than 4,000 "May Day Strong" events planned across the United States.
Daniel Bertossa, general secretary for Public Services International, said this year's May Day demonstrations are providing a desperately needed backlash to power grabs being made by the global billionaire class.
Bertossa pointed to the US-Israel attack on Iran, as well as Trump's repeated threats to invade Greenland, as key turning points that have pushed workers to organize and fight back.
"Rising living costs caused by the war are now driving anger among working-class people and producing a rare and powerful moment to connect and educate," said Bertossa. "Fascists don't have the answers to the economic pain they exploited to get elected—international affairs impact us all—and international working-class solidarity matters."
Bertossa added that "May Day is a vivid reminder that working-class politics is not a spectator sport," and "we have never won by watching, waiting, or relying on great power leaders to gift us our future."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Pentagon Is Lying': Iranian Foreign Minister Puts US Cost of War at $100 Billion
Analysts have also cast serious doubt on the Pentagon's official estimate of the Iran war's price tag, with one arguing the conflict cost more than $25 billion "in the first two weeks."
May 01, 2026
Iran's foreign minister on Friday accused the Pentagon of deliberately misleading the American public with its formal estimate that the war on Iran has so far cost the US $25 billion—a number that the chief Iranian diplomat said was a fourfold undercount of the conflict's true price tag.
"The Pentagon is lying," Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote on social media. "[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu's gamble has directly cost America $100 billion so far, four times what is claimed. Indirect costs for US taxpayers are FAR higher. Monthly bill for each American household is $500 and rising fast."
The Iranian diplomat's comments came days after the Pentagon's acting comptroller, Jules Hurst, told US lawmakers under oath that the Trump administration has thus far spent $25 billion on the historically unpopular war of choice. The New York Times observed that Hurst "did not elaborate on the figure, which was strikingly smaller than the $200 billion the Pentagon had initially requested for the conflict and suggested a major slowdown in expenditures since the start of the war, when officials estimated it had cost more than $11 billion in its first six days."
Outside analysts' estimates of the illegal war's total cost to American taxpayers have varied widely, but most put the number higher than the $25 billion offered by the Pentagon.
The Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, estimated earlier this month that the Pentagon was likely to have spent more than $33 billion during the first 39 days of the conflict. An April 10 assessment released by the conservative American Enterprise Institute after the ceasefire began put the war's cost between $25 billion and $35 billion.
Independent policy analyst Stephen Semler has estimated that the US spent nearly $29 billion on the Iran war during just the first two weeks of the conflict—an average of $2.1 billion per day.
"Hegseth lied to Congress when he said the Iran war has cost $25 billion," Semler wrote Thursday on social media. "It cost more than that in the first two weeks."
On top of direct war spending, lawmakers and experts have pointed to indirect costs of war in the form of higher gas and food prices paid by American consumers.
US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) said on the House floor on Thursday that the Iran war has cost Americans over $630 billion—or $5,000 per household on average—"because of the increase in the price of food, the price of gas, the price of electricity."
"We need to end this war now, and help the American people reduce costs," said Khanna.
Linda Bilmes, a public policy expert at the Harvard Kennedy School, said in early April that the Iran war's cost to the US is likely to exceed $1 trillion in the long-term, when accounting for veterans' care and other outlays.
"It is hard to measure the exact cost," said Bilmes. "But based on what we know now, it is costing about two billion dollars a day in short-term, upfront costs, which is the tip of the iceberg."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular



