In yesterday's Orders List, the Supreme Court denied the petition for a write of mandamus in In re Kelsey Juliana, a last ditch attempt to revive the so-called "Kids Climate" case. At long last, this audacious effort to claim that the federal government is violating the constitution by failing to take more action to address climate change may be put to rest.
As I noted when the petition was filed, there was no chance the Supreme Court would act on this request, a point on which Dan Farber agreed. Nonetheless, the New York Times reported credulously on the filing, as if it had any legal merit or likelihood of success.
The Department of Justice recognized that the petition posed no risk and waived filing a response. Yesterday, not a single justice indicated any interest in the case.
From the start, Juliana was the sort of case that made for interesting discussions in the faculty lounge, but had no more than superficial grounding in any applicable precedent or doctrine (a point I briefly develop in this forthcoming symposium essay). Yet insofar as it attracted attention and resources, it risked diverting the focus of climate change efforts away from things that could be potentially meaningful.
I think one can finally say that Juliana is gone for good, and that climate law will be better for it.
The post Supreme Court Refuses to Resurrect the Kids Climate Case appeared first on Reason.com.
