These young Alaskans are suing the state to stop a $39 billion natural gas pipeline – Mother Jones

This story was originally published by the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate office collaboration.

Eight young people are suing the government of Alaska – the nation’s fastest-warming state – claiming that a major new fossil fuel project violates the state’s constitutional rights.

State-owned Alaska Gasline Development Corporation has proposed a $38.7 billion gas export project that would roughly triple the state’s greenhouse gas emissions for decades, the lawsuit says. Scientists have long warned that fossil fuel extraction must be quickly curbed to ensure a livable future.

The Alaska LNG project would involve building a gas processing plant on the state’s North Slope, an 800-mile pipeline and a liquefaction plant on the Kenai Peninsula that would prepare the gas for export to the Asia.

“Young plaintiffs are particularly vulnerable and disproportionately harmed by the climate damages that would result from the Alaska LNG Project,” the suit states.

In an unusual move in 2014, Alaska passed a law amending several state laws to direct the state to carry out the project.

“We are already seeing huge impacts on our ability to sustain our livelihoods due to climate change. »

Opponents, ranging in age from 11 to 22, argue that the proposal – and this legislation in particular – violates two sections of the Alaska Constitution: the right to protected natural resources. for “present and future generations” and the right to be free from government encroachment on life, liberty and security. property.

“The acceleration of climate change that this project will bring will affect what the land provides and contributes to my culture,” said Summer Sagoonick, the 22-year-old lead plaintiff in the case and a member of the Iñupiaq tribe. “I rely on the courts to protect my rights.”

Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor said his office would carefully review the lawsuit and called it a “misguided effort.”

“At first glance, we can see that this is an attempt to block the development of Alaska’s natural gas reserves based on a so-called environmental safety rationale,” he said. . He added that Alaska was experiencing a shortage of gas, which he called a “clean fuel.” And he said if the state didn’t develop gas, somewhere else probably would, “without strict standards to protect the environment.”

The case was filed by Our Children’s Trust, the nonprofit law firm that won an unprecedented climate victory last year on behalf of young Montanans.

Global warming is already taking a toll on young Alaskans, the lawsuit says, by “interfering with their natural development, disrupting their cultural traditions and identities, and limiting their access to the natural resources on which they depend.”

The fish and other species that the plaintiffs feed on are dying because of climate change. More frequent and severe wildfires threaten young people’s homes and expose them to dangerous smoke pollution. And knowledge of the threat of the climate crisis has harmful consequences on their health, the complaint states, among other things.

These effects have been particularly harsh on Alaska Native youth, the complaint says. This includes Sagoonick, which resides in the village of Unalakleet, which is vulnerable to climate-induced flooding, rapid thawing of permafrost and severe coastal erosion.

“We are already seeing huge impacts on our ability to sustain our livelihoods due to climate change,” she said.

Sagoonick learned to fish, hunt and gather when she was young; she relies on local subsistence foods, including salmon and other fish, seal, duck and cranberries, for the vast majority of her diet, the lawsuit says. “As our water warms and the land erodes, it poses a threat to our food and cultural practices,” Sagoonick said.

The “right to a livable climate” is “arguably the bare minimum,” two state Supreme Court justices argued in a previous dissent.

Tim Fitzpatrick of the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation said, “AGDC is required by Alaska law to market North Slope natural gas because of the substantial environmental, economic and safety benefits energy it brings to our state. He added that the project had “withstood intense environmental review by two successive administrations because of its clear and abundant benefits.”

Four of the plaintiffs, including Sagoonick, were also part of a 2017 lawsuit filed by Our Children’s Trust against Alaska that claimed the state’s promotion of fossil fuels in general violated the challengers’ state constitutional rights.

In 2022, the The Alaska Supreme Court rejected that case in a 3-2 vote. But the two dissenting justices said that under Alaska’s constitution, the “right to a livable climate” is “arguably the strictest minimum” when it comes to rights enshrined in the state constitution.

“They are the only two Alaska Supreme Court justices to answer the question of whether Alaska’s Constitution guarantees the right to a climate system that supports human life,” said Andrew Welle, senior attorney of Our Children’s Trust and Alaska plaintiffs’ attorney. “We are therefore seeking to have the full court decide the same issue.”

Although it didn’t set a precedent, Welle said the decision was “a strong indication.”

The complaint marks the first time Our Children’s Trust is challenging a specific fossil fuel project, rather than a government’s overall support for fossil fuels. The State of Alaska is named as a defendant, as is the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation and that company’s president, Frank Richards.

The young plaintiffs hope the court will issue an order barring the state from moving forward with the project. They also seek to set a precedent by recognizing that fossil fuel infrastructure violates the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights.

“This is the first step in ensuring a broader vision of climate justice for Alaska’s youth can be built upon in future cases and enforcement actions,” Welle said.

Earlier this year, the Montana Supreme Court upheld a groundbreaking ruling in a case filed by Our Children’s Trust, requiring state regulators to consider the climate crisis before approving fossil fuel development permits. The state appealed that decision, and on Tuesday the court said it would hear oral arguments next July.

Our Children’s Trust also has lawsuits pending in Hawaii (to be tried in June) as well as in Florida, Utah and Virginia. On Monday, he filed an amended complaint against the federal government on behalf of California’s youth.

A federal appeals court this month granted the Biden administration’s request to overturn a landmark federal case involving Our Children’s Trust.