

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Julia Olson, Executive Director & Chief Legal Counsel, Our Children’s Trust, julia@ourchildrenstrust.org
Andrea Rodgers, andrea@ourchildrenstrust.org
Cass DiPaola, Communications Manager, Fossil Free Media, cassidy@fossilfree.media
For interviews with youth plaintiffs, contact John Mackin, john@ourchildrenstrust.org
Today, the People vs. Fossil Fuels coalition digitally delivered an online petition to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Attorney General Merrick Garland, demanding that Attorney General Garland end the DOJ's opposition to the children’s climate lawsuit, Juliana v. United States, proceeding to trial. John Beard, Founder and CEO of the Port Arthur Community Action Network and member of the People vs. Fossil Fuels Steering Committee, and youth leader Zanagee Artis, Founder and Executive Director of Zero Hour, co-delivered this petition on behalf of the coalition, more than 255 organizational sponsors, and more than 50,000 individuals across the United States and around the world who signed the petition.
The petition was delivered shortly after Federal Judge Ann Aiken, of the U.S. District Court in Oregon, on June 1, 2023, granted the young plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint, putting their case back on track to trial. After eight years, evidence that indisputably proves the federal government’s knowing perpetuation of the climate crisis will come to light, in open court, and Judge Aiken will rule whether the U.S. energy system violates the youth’s constitutional rights.
People vs. Fossil Fuels, a coalition of over 1,200 climate justice, Indigenous, Black, Latino, social justice, economic justice, progressive, youth, faith, and other organizations, spearheaded this petition effort in support of the Juliana youth plaintiffs and their landmark constitutional climate case. This petition is led by climate, public health, children’s, legal, labor, minority, business, faith, human rights, and environmental justice organizations - including Amnesty International USA, Center for Biological Diversity, Food & Water Watch, Friends of the Earth, GreenFaith, Greenpeace USA, Hip Hop Caucus, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Sunrise Movement, and 350.org. The petition was launched last June with over 160 tweets in just a few hours from individual supporters and key organizations, including the Indigenous Environmental Network and Center for International Environmental Law, that rallied via a tweetstorm standing in solidarity with the youth plaintiffs and urging individuals to sign the petition.
The petition notes that “For seven years, these 21 young people, from across the United States and including 11 Black, Brown, and Indigenous youth, have waited for their day in court, delayed again and again by tactics employed by the Department of Justice to impede or dismiss their case. And for almost seven years, young people like these 21 young Americans have suffered from increasingly severe climate harms.”
“Judge Aiken’s ruling has affirmed what we’ve long known: that these children are bringing constitutional claims that deserve to be heard and the evidence of how their own government has knowingly caused and worsened the climate crisis, harming these young people and violating their rights, should be considered by a judge in open court,” stated Julia Olson, Executive Director and Chief Legal Counsel of Our Children’s Trust. “However, for several long years, these 21 youth plaintiffs have experienced delay tactics from the Department of Justice under three different presidential administrations. This is a moment for the DOJ under President Biden to change course and end its opposition to this case proceeding to trial. These children deserve their day in court.”
Olson concluded, “Today, we are grateful for the support of people around the world who have signed this petition to urge Attorney General Garland to end the DOJ’s opposition to this case proceeding to trial. As these thousands of people across the United States and around the globe have demanded, their voices loud and clear: Let the Youth Be Heard!”
“Today, I am proud to deliver a petition to the U.S. Department of Justice in support of the 21 young plaintiffs in Juliana v. U.S. On June 1st, Judge Aiken issued a long-awaited ruling that finally puts their case back on track to trial! Frontline Gulf Coastal communities of color in my own part of the country, and young people across the nation, especially youth living within environmental justice communities, continue to suffer the impacts from the climate crisis, including pollution, and social and environmental injustice. Today, we send a message to the Biden DOJ - These young Americans have the right to be heard by their nation’s courts. Justice deferred, regardless of age, is justice DENIED. End the DOJ’s campaign to deny these youth access to justice,” stated John Beard, Founder and CEO of Port Arthur Community Action Network, on behalf of the People vs. Fossil Fuels coalition.
“While our government continues to take actions that worsen and accelerate climate change, the youngest generations of Americans continue to endure record-breaking climate disasters at an increasing rate. Young people fear when the next devastating flood, wildfire, drought, heatwave, or other climate disaster will be. It’s long past time for the Department of Justice to end its opposition to the Juliana plaintiffs and youth climate justice. Young Americans have the right to be heard by our nation's courts, the branch of our government that has a duty to protect our constitutional right to a livable planet,” said Zanagee Artis, Founder and Executive Director of Zero Hour.
With the ruling released, the People vs. Fossil Fuels coalition, in coordination with Our Children’s Trust, has launched a new action urging Attorney General Merrick Garland and the DOJ to not use an extreme legal tool - a petition for writ of mandamus - to try to further delay justice. The coalition and supporters from across the world continue to join the Juliana 21 in solidarity by also calling and tweeting the DOJ.
Represented by attorneys at the nonprofit public interest law firm, Our Children’s Trust, Juliana v. United States was originally filed in 2015. The Juliana plaintiffs argue in their complaint that their federal government has directly contributed to the climate crisis more than any other government on the planet -- including creating a fossil fuel energy system that causes and worsens climate change -- and thus is harming the youth plaintiffs, violating their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property, as well as failing to protect essential public trust resources and the children’s rights of equal protection of the law. The youth plaintiffs are now between the ages of 15 and 26.
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.
"The case for windfall taxes has never been clearer," said 350.org's chief executive.
An analysis released Monday estimates that oil and gas price spikes driven by the US-Israeli war on Iran have so far cost consumers and businesses around the world over $100 billion—money that has flowed into the coffers of some of the wealthiest, most powerful fossil fuel companies on the planet.
The new analysis by 350.org finds that, just over a month into the war, consumers and businesses have lost between $104.2 billion and $111.6 billion to rising oil and gas prices—an estimate that the environmental group acknowledges is likely conservative, given it doesn't account for "wider knock-on effects, such as rising fertiliser and food costs, declines in economic output and employment, or broader inflation driven by fossil fuel price volatility. "
The more than $100 billion, 350.org said, "has been siphoned from ordinary people to oil and gas companies."
“On top of the incalculable suffering of families and communities torn apart by the war, ordinary people around the world are paying an extraordinary price through fossil fuel-driven energy spikes," said Anne Jellema, 350.org's chief executive. "Over $100 billion has gone straight into the pockets of fossil fuel companies, while families struggle to afford energy and basic necessities."
"The case for windfall taxes," Jellema added, "has never been clearer.”

The analysis was published as global oil prices rose again following a weekend missile attack on Israel by Yemen's Houthis and Trump's threat to "take the oil in Iran," signaling another potential escalation in a war that has already killed thousands, sparked an appalling humanitarian crisis, and destabilized the global economy.
One key beneficiary of the chaos is the fossil fuel industry, which is set to reap billions in windfall profits thanks to rising oil and gas prices. Reuters reported late last week that analysts covering Chevron, Shell, and ExxonMobil have significantly raised earnings estimates for the fossil fuel giants in response to war-fueled price surges.
"US shale producers and other companies without major operations in the Middle East should gain the most, benefiting from higher prices without costs associated with shut-in production, stranded tankers, or expensive repairs to war-hit facilities," Reuters noted. "Still, executives said the big profits will probably not boost their planned capital spending on new production."
Earlier this month, Democratic lawmakers in the US Congress introduced legislation that would impose a windfall profit tax on large American oil companies and return the money to consumers in the form of quarterly rebates. The bill stands no realistic chance of getting through the Republican-controlled Congress, which is awash in Big Oil campaign cash.
“American consumers are once again getting squeezed at the gas pump as President Trump’s war of choice in Iran sends gas prices soaring and money flowing to his Big Oil donors,” said US Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the bill's lead sponsor in the Senate. “We should send any big windfall for Big Oil back to the hardworking people who paid for it at the gas pump."
The president's decision means the US "will not illegally intercept and seize the entirely legal and legitimate sovereign trade in oil," said one observer.
President Donald Trump said Sunday that his administration would let a Russia-owned tanker carrying an estimated 730,000 barrels of oil to reach Cuba, loosening the illegal fuel blockade that has intensified the island's already-grave humanitarian crisis.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump said that "if a country wants to send some oil into Cuba right now, I have no problem," backing off his previous threat to tariff any nation that supplied the besieged island with fuel. Cuba has not received any oil imports since January 9, sparking nationwide blackouts and food shortages and leaving hospitals without critical supplies—with deadly consequences for patients.
Trump insisted that the oil on the Russian tanker—which experts say is enough to buy Cuba at least several weeks of energy—is "not going to have an impact," declaring, "Cuba is finished."
"They have a bad regime, and they have very bad and corrupt leadership," added Trump, who presides over what analysts have deemed the most corrupt administration in US history. "Whether or not they get a boat of oil is not going to matter."
Reporter: There's a report that the US is going to let a Russian oil tanker go to Cuba?
Trump: If a country wants to send some oil into Cuba, I have no problem with that.
Reporter: Do you worry that that helps Putin?
Trump: It doesn’t help him. He loses one boatload of oil.… pic.twitter.com/8Vh6gHwaxs
— Acyn (@Acyn) March 30, 2026
Trump's comments came after The New York Times reported that, "barring orders instructing it otherwise," the US Coast Guard would not intercept the Russian tanker as it approached Cuba.
The Russian vessel, known as the Anatoly Kolodkin, is expected to reach the island by Monday night, providing some reprieve to a nation whose economy has been strangled by unlawful US economic warfare for decades. In recent days, an international convoy of activists has delivered tons of food, medicine, and other aid to the island, but the shipments are a Band-Aid on a gaping wound.
Michael Gallant, a member of the Progressive International Secretariat, welcomed news that the US is allowing the Russian tanker to reach Cuba as "very good news"—but said Trump's decision is hardly deserving of praise.
Very good news. “The US will allow,” of course, means “will not illegally intercept and seize the entirely legal and legitimate sovereign trade in oil” https://t.co/YF2RRIXC2S
— Michael Galant (@michael_galant) March 29, 2026
Trump imposed the fuel blockade in January, absurdly characterizing Cuba as an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to US national security.
Earlier this month, Trump threatened to "take" Cuba by force, calling it a "very weakened nation." Trump's remarks prompted Cuba's president, Miguel Díaz-Canel, to vow "impregnable resistance" to any US attempt to seize the island. The Trump administration is reportedly seeking Díaz-Canel's removal as a necessary condition in talks with the Cuban government.
Trump's threats led Reps. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) to introduce legislation last week that would prohibit the administration from using federal funds for any attack on Cuba without congressional authorization.
"Trump has started illegal regime change conflicts in Venezuela and Iran and is now threatening Cuba," Jayapal said in a statement. "These military attacks put our troops in danger, endanger innocent civilians, waste billions of taxpayer dollars, and are not what the American people want."
"Trump promised to end forever wars—he lied," Jayapal added. "Congress alone has the power to declare war, something Trump clearly does not respect. He has no plan to improve conditions for the Cuban people or promote democracy, and we must pass this legislation to block him from acting on a whim."
"This is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war."
Pope Leo XIV used his Palm Sunday sermon to take what appears to be a shot at US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
In his sermon, excerpts of which he published on social media, the pope emphasized Christian teachings against violence while criticizing anyone who would invoke Jesus Christ to justify a war.
"This is our God: Jesus, King of Peace, who rejects war, whom no one can use to justify war," Pope Leo said. "He does not listen to the prayers of those who wage war, but rejects them."
The pope also encouraged followers to "raise our prayers to the Prince of Peace so that he may support people wounded by war and open concrete paths of reconciliation and peace."
While speaking at the Pentagon last week, Hegseth directly invoked Jesus when discussing the Trump administration's unprovoked and unconstitutional war with Iran.
Specifically, Hegseth offered up a prayer in which he asked God to give US soldiers "wisdom in every decision, endurance for the trial ahead, unbreakable unity, and overwhelming violence of action against those who deserve no mercy," adding that "we ask these things with bold confidence in the mighty and powerful name of Jesus Christ."
Mother Jones contributing writer Alex Nguyen described the pope's sermon as a "rebuke" of Hegseth, whom he noted "has been open about his support for a Christian crusade" in the Middle East.
Pope Leo is not the only Catholic leader speaking against using Christian faith to justify wars of aggression. Two weeks ago, Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, the Latin patriarch of Jerusalem, said "the abuse and manipulation of God’s name to justify this and any other war is the gravest sin we can commit at this time."
“War is first and foremost political and has very material interests, like most wars," Cardinal Pizzaballa added.