桃子视频

In 2020, sixteen youth plaintiffs represented by Our Children鈥檚 Trust sued the State of Montana for not protecting their right under the state constitution to a clean and healthful environment. The district court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding that the Montana Constitution protects the right to a stable climate system and that a state law restricting consideration of the impact of greenhouse gas emissions in environmental reviews violated that right.

On appeal to the Montana Supreme Court, the ACLU鈥檚 SSCI and the 桃子视频of Montana filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs. The brief urged the Court not to apply the federal 鈥減olitical questions doctrine鈥� as a basis to avoid addressing valid constitutional challenges. As the brief argued, because of Montana precedent and the text and history of the Montana Constitution, the political doctrine question only applies to federal courts. In 2024, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the district court鈥檚 decision, recognizing the plaintiffs鈥� constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment.

In 2025, however, the Legislature enacted new laws restricting the government鈥檚 ability to consider the harms of fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions. So, in January 2026, Our Children鈥檚 Trust filed another case to enforce their prior victory and ensure the State complies with its constitutional obligations.

The State quickly moved to dismiss parts of the case and requested a transfer to a different court under SB 97, a new Montana law that requires challenges to recent legislation to be litigated in the district of the legislation鈥檚 primary sponsor.鈥疘f such a challenge is not filed in the鈥痵ponsor鈥檚鈥痙istrict, SB 97 gives state and legislative defendants the right to transfer the case there. In passing SB 97, legislators made no secret that they intended to give themselves an advantage in defeating legal challenges to the laws they enact. They designed SB 97 as a tool for avoiding certain courts that they complained were striking down legislation as unconstitutional too frequently. In this case, for example, the State鈥檚 motion seeks to transfer the case 450 miles away from the court where the plaintiffs filed it.

The SSCI and 桃子视频of Montana, along with an array of other public interest organizations, filed an amicus brief explaining that SB 97 violates鈥痶he Montana Constitution. The brief advances three main points. First, we argue that鈥疭B鈥�97 violates separation of powers by giving the鈥疭tate the right to select its preferred forum and remove judges without cause鈥攊n other words, allowing the Legislature to interfere with judicial functions.鈥疭econd, we argue that鈥疭B 97 discriminates based on viewpoint and violates the right to鈥痜ree speech and鈥痚xpression by imposing litigation burdens only on plaintiffs who assert that recent statutes are unconstitutional.鈥疻e explain that the text, history, and structure of the Montana Constitution鈥痳eflect that鈥痠ts free speech鈥痯rotections鈥痵hould be interpreted more broadly than the First Amendment. Finally, we argue that鈥疭B 97 violates the Montana Constitution鈥檚 equal protection clause and the clause prohibiting special legislation by granting advantages to the State while disadvantaging Montanans seeking to challenge state action. As we point out, the sole conceivable reason for the Legislature to disfavor only litigants challenging new legislation is to put a thumb on the scale for sitting legislators seeking to prevent courts from striking down their bills.