A federal court shot down youth climate activists’ bid to revive a lawsuit targeting the Trump administration’s fossil fuel push.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday refused to rehear the lawsuit brought by twenty-two young climate activists, which initially challenged President Donald Trump’s fossil fuel agenda, leaving intact a panel decision that found the plaintiffs lacked standing. The youths in Lighthiser v. Trump argued that Trump’s executive orders promoting fossil fuel development would increase emissions and worsen climate-related harms in the future.
The 22 plaintiffs, from Montana, Oregon, Hawaii, California and Florida, filed Lighthiser v. Trump in Montana District Court in May 2025. In October 2025, the Montana court dismissed the youths’ lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction, despite finding “overwhelming evidence” that “climate change” will harm the plaintiffs in the future and defining the situation as “children’s health emergency.”
The plaintiffs appealed the dismissal to the Ninth Circuit in June 2026, with a three-judge panel affirming the Montana court’s decision. The plaintiffs then petitioned for en banc review in July, asking the full Ninth Circuit to reconsider the panel’s ruling.
Our Children’s Trust, an Oregon-based nonprofit representing the children, has brought a string of climate cases against federal agencies. In September 2025, the youth plaintiffs presented live testimony in federal court, which their attorneys described as the first such testimony in a federal constitutional climate case.
Our Children’s Trust did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.
The plaintiffs targeted three Trump executive orders—Unleashing American Energy, DECLARING A NATIONAL ENERGY EMERGENCY, Reinvigorating America’s Beautiful Clean Coal Industry and Amending Executive Order 14241—from early 2025 that sought to expand fossil-fuel development and decrease permitting obstacles.
Lighthiser argued that Trump’s executive orders are harming young Americans across the states, citing a variety of climate events. The plaintiffs also cited another Our Children’s Trust case Juliana v. United States, where the judges decided that the judicial branch lacks the power to affect federal policy.
“The panel’s decision is the first in American history to deny courts the power to review an unconstitutional executive order. That is not a small mistake. That is constitutional corruption,” said Julia Olson, chief legal counsel and co-executive director of Our Children’s Trust, in a press release . “No president should be able to direct a sweeping fossil fuel agenda that endangers children’s lives and face zero judicial review. The full Ninth Circuit has the opportunity and the obligation to correct that.”
The youth plaintiffs’ defeat comes amid other recent setbacks for climate litigation. In March, the Maryland Supreme Court dismissed lawsuits brought by Baltimore, Annapolis and Anne Arundel County seeking damages from major fossil fuel companies over alleged climate harms.
A Pennsylvania judge similarly tossed Bucks County’s climate lawsuit against major oil companies in May 2025, finding Pennsylvania courts lacked jurisdiction over claims involving interstate air pollution.
(DCNF)
