Do we have a fundamental human right to a healthy climate? If so, how do we know when our rights have been violated? 

Global climate agreements are structured to keep warming below 1.5C (or 2.7F, for our American friends). But this number reflects a political compromise—what global leaders believe is politically achievable—not a scientific understanding of climatic risks. Below this threshold, science predicts dire consequences. (Think Biblical: floods, fires, pestilence, and the like.) Yet, in informal and legal discussions of climate change, 1.5C is treated as some kind of legal litmus test. 

Professors Jen Marlow (CalPoly Humboldt), Lauren Sanckin (U. of Washington School of Law) and attorney Andrea Rodgers join Gang Green to talk about their most recent scholarship and break down the state of national and international litigation to recognize the right to a healthy climate.

For more info, see the soon-to-be published article in the Fall 2022 issue of Virginia Environmental Law Journal:

• The Injustice of 1.5˚C–2˚C: The Need for a Scientifically Based Standard of Fundamental Rights Protection in Constitutional Climate Change Cases            by Lauren Sancken, Andrea Rodgers, and Jennifer Marlow​

Support the show