Young plaintiffs' climate case is solid, Professor Frank tells Harvard Political Review

The Harvard Political Review quoted Professor of Environmental Practice Richard M. Frank about Juliana v. United States, the landmark lawsuit filed by a group of “youth plaintiffs” that alleges the federal government has failed in its duty to regulate human-caused climate change.

The HPR piece points out that the suit rests on the seldom-used legal rationale of public trust doctrine. Public trust doctrine, the HPR explains, holds that “in some circumstances, the government is compelled to maintain certain natural resources — typically waterways or wildlife — within public control for the benefit of the people.” The Juliana case asks whether the air around us should be included as well.

Frank told the HPR the plaintiffs have a strong case, noting that “air is the natural resource that, by its physical properties, is least capable of private ownership and exploitation.” But Frank added that “air’s amorphous character makes it difficult for governmental and nonprofit trustees to protect.”

The HPR published the essay Oct. 17, before Chief Justice John Roberts and then the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted temporary stays on the case in response to motions by the Trump administration.

Richard M. Frank ’74 is a leader in the field of environmental law, Professor of Environmental Practice and the founding director of the California Environmental Law and Policy Center at UC Davis School of Law.