{"id":157734,"date":"2024-05-22T07:53:04","date_gmt":"2024-05-22T11:53:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/?post_type=case&p=157734"},"modified":"2025-09-08T15:36:47","modified_gmt":"2025-09-08T19:36:47","slug":"held-v-montana","status":"publish","type":"case","link":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/cases\/held-v-montana","title":{"rendered":"Held v. Montana"},"menu_order":0,"template":"","supreme_court_term":[],"court":[],"class_list":["post-157734","case","type-case","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":{"case_number":"DA 23-0575","featured_image":"","issues":[46553,46667,46519,46673,46507],"court_type":"state_supreme_court","case_type":false,"supreme_court_term":null,"state_territory_affiliate":[329],"status":"closed","date_updated":"20240522","whats_at_stake":"This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLU\u2019s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.","call_to_action":null,"summary":"Federal courts have relied on the prudential \u201cpolitical questions doctrine\u201d to avoid addressing questions that are textually committed to other branches of the government and lack judicially discoverable and manageable standards. In recent years, some state courts have adopted this doctrine to dismiss otherwise valid constitutional challenges, even those involving egregious harms. This case questions whether a state\u2019s affirmative protection of young people from climate change, as set forth in Montana's constitutional right to a \"clean and healthful environment\", could fall under the political doctrine question, and thus, is nonjusticiable.\r\n\r\nIn 2020, 16 youth plaintiffs represented by Our Children\u2019s Trust sued the state of Montana for not protecting their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment. In the district court proceeding, they argued that the State of Montana\u2019s energy policy perpetuates a fossil-fuel based system that contributes to climate change and violates the youth plaintiffs\u2019 constitutional right to clean and healthful environment, as well as their right to seek safety, health, and happiness, and to individual dignity. The lower court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs and ruled that the Montana Environmental Policy Act\u2014which prohibited the state from considering greenhouse gas emissions as a factor when pursuing energy projects\u2014was unconstitutional.\r\nThe ACLU, alongside the ACLU of Montana, wrote an amicus brief arguing that the reach of the political question doctrine should be limited under the Montana Constitution.\r\n\r\nThe brief relies on Montana caselaw to argue that the political doctrine question only applies to federal courts and should remain that way according to the text and history of the Montana Constitution. Other state courts have declined to expand the political doctrine question and even if the doctrine were expanded, it would not support nonjusticiability in this case","case_decision":"","featured_case":false,"legal_project":"","date_filed":null,"administration_challenged":"","constitutional_principle":[],"drupal_node_id":"","legal_documents":[{"court":1974,"documents":[{"document_options":"document","document":157890,"title":"ACLU Amicus Brief","subtitle":"","date_filed":null,"drupal_node_id":"","slug":"","child_documents":null}]}],"plaintiffs":"","co-counsel":"","press_releases_related_to_cases":"","related_content_cases":"","related_content_documents":"","related_content_publications":""},"yoast_head":"\nAmerican Civil Liberties Union<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLU\u2019s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Held v. Montana | American Civil Liberties Union\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLU\u2019s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/cases\/held-v-montana\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Civil Liberties Union\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-09-08T19:36:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@aclu\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/cases\/held-v-montana\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/cases\/held-v-montana\",\"name\":\"Held v. Montana | American Civil Liberties Union\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2024-05-22T11:53:04+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-09-08T19:36:47+00:00\",\"description\":\"This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLU\u2019s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/cases\/held-v-montana\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/\",\"name\":\"American Civil Liberties Union\",\"description\":\"The ACLU dares to create a more perfect union \u2014 beyond one person, party, or side. Our mission is to realize this promise of the United States Constitution for all and expand the reach of its guarantees.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"American Civil Liberties Union","description":"This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLU\u2019s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Held v. Montana | American Civil Liberties Union","og_description":"This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLU\u2019s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/cases\/held-v-montana","og_site_name":"American Civil Liberties Union","article_modified_time":"2025-09-08T19:36:47+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_site":"@aclu","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/cases\/held-v-montana","url":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/cases\/held-v-montana","name":"Held v. Montana | American Civil Liberties Union","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/#website"},"datePublished":"2024-05-22T11:53:04+00:00","dateModified":"2025-09-08T19:36:47+00:00","description":"This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLU\u2019s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/cases\/held-v-montana"]}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/","name":"American Civil Liberties Union","description":"The ACLU dares to create a more perfect union \u2014 beyond one person, party, or side. Our mission is to realize this promise of the United States Constitution for all and expand the reach of its guarantees.","inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"distributor_meta":false,"distributor_terms":false,"distributor_media":false,"distributor_original_site_name":"American Civil Liberties Union","distributor_original_site_url":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org","push-errors":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/case\/157734","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/case"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/case"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/case\/157734\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":214868,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/case\/157734\/revisions\/214868"}],"acf:post":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/affiliate_info\/329"},{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue\/46507"},{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue\/46673"},{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue\/46519"},{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue\/46667"},{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/issue\/46553"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=157734"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"supreme_court_term","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/supreme_court_term?post=157734"},{"taxonomy":"court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.aclu.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/court?post=157734"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}