Last month, a district court judge in Montana ruled in favor of 16 youth plaintiffs in a landmark climate lawsuit. In Held v. Montana, young Montanans ranging from ages 5 to 22 sued the state, arguing that lawmakers have consciously prioritized the development of fossil fuels over the well-being of Montana’s residents and the protection of natural resources.

This case marks the first time that a U.S. court has declared a government’s constitutional duty to protect people from climate change. Not only does this case model how young people can engage with the legal system, it also sets precedent for similar lawsuits, proving state constitutions as a viable pathway to scoring seemingly unlikely civil rights victories.

Joining us today is Mat dos Santos, an attorney for Our Children’s Trust, the legal nonprofit group that brought the case on behalf of the youth, and Claire Vlases, one of the plaintiffs. They’ll explain what it took to get this case off the ground and what implications it could have for the future.

Kids Sued Montana Over Climate Change—Here’s How They Won

At Liberty is a weekly podcast from the ACLU that explores the biggest civil rights and civil liberties issues of the day. A production of ACLU, Inc.

News

On April 17, students at Columbia University set up an encampment to show support for Palestinians and demand the university divest from its business related to or within Israel as a means of anti-war protest. In the weeks since its inception, the protest movement has spread, with encampments set up on over 100 college and university campuses worldwide.

But as these protests continue, we’ve watched university leadership and campus and local law enforcement meet these demonstrations with a disturbing response. In the last several weeks, over 2,000 people have been arrested or detained on campuses across the country. Students and faculty have faced arrest, criminal charges, suspensions, and excessive use of force from police. This comes alongside the ongoing threats to and in some cases, the complete suspension of chapters of pro-Palestinian organizations like Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace on campuses nationwide.

Universities have long been a site of protest, particularly anti-war protest, and a safe space for students, faculty, and staff to freely express themselves in the exchange of ideas. As these protests continue, our ACLU affiliates are keeping a pulse on campus demonstrations, advocating for students’ rights, and keeping universities accountable when they act with disproportionate and inequitable discipline. So on this episode of At Liberty, we’re bringing you dispatches from affiliate staff: Veronica Salama, staff attorney at the New York Civil Liberties Union, Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, and Ramis Wadood, staff attorney at the ACLU of Michigan. You’ll also hear from Jenn Rolnick Borchetta, Deputy Project Director on Policing in the Criminal Law Reform Project at ACLU National. They’ll share what they’re seeing on the ground and the legal concern and action being taken at this time. Together, we can pave a way forward that protects activism at our nation’s academic institutions and beyond.

To learn more about the ACLU's response to the rise in anti-war student protests and the increased police presence on college campuses nationwide, check out these resources:

https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-urges-college-and-university-leaders-to-protect-free-speech-and-academic-freedom
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/students-rights
https://www.nyclu.org/resources/know-your-rights/know-your-rights-students-higher-education-first-amendment#resources

Are you concerned that your civil rights have been violated at a protest? Visit the website of your ACLU affiliate to access forms to file a complaint: https://www.aclu.org/affiliates

Special Edition: What We're Seeing at Campus Anti-War Protests

With the rise of anti-war protests and encampments taking place on college campuses across the country, we are sharing an episode from a couple of years ago that addresses some questions related to free speech in an education setting. In this episode, our resident free speech expert Ben Wizner answers listener questions. You’ll hear us talk about the different first amendment protections at K-12 schools and universities, which vary between public and privately funded institutions.

We are monitoring the student-led protests in support of Palestine and the subsequent use of force ordered by local authorities across the country and will bring you an episode next week with dispatches from our affiliates who have taken legal action or who have demonstrated legal concern. Until then, we hope this episode gives you some sense of student speech rights and why we are so committed to protecting these rights at the ACLU.

Answering Your Student Speech Questions

Today, on April 24, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in a case that will determine the future of emergency abortion care. At issue in the case of Idaho v. United States is whether or not doctors in states where abortion is banned have to continue to deny abortion care—even in emergency settings—despite the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires all hospitals to provide life saving and medically stabilizing health care to anyone who shows up at their emergency room.

Currently, medical providers in Idaho can only perform an abortion in the event that the pregnant person will imminently die without one. Even if a pregnant person will incur permanent disability or undue harm to their life without an abortion, the procedure is still banned. As you can imagine, these two laws have put doctors in a precarious position in Idaho. The circumstances are even more dire for pregnant patients in the state, particularly those with disabilities. Disabled pregnant people are far more likely to necessitate this kind of care than their non-disabled peers, as most disabled pregnant folks already have high risk pregnancies.
Disabled people know all too well the risks of not accessing care when it's needed, and the hardship, pain, and suffering that can escape the claw of “imminent death.” So, today we're talking about the intersection of disability and abortion rights, in regard to this case and more broadly. 

Joining me to discuss this is Dr. Robyn Powell, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma College of Law, specializing in disability and family law. She's also a co-investigator at the National Research Center for Parents with Disabilities.

Special Edition: Emergency Abortion Care at SCOTUS

On April 22, the Supreme Court will hear the case of Johnson v. Grants Pass, the most significant court case about the rights of people experiencing homelessness in decades. At its core, Grants Pass will decide whether cities are allowed to punish people for things like sleeping outside with a pillow or blanket—even when there are no safe shelter options—posing potentially great risk to the 250,000 Americans who sleep outside on any given night.

This case comes at a time when the affordable housing market is strapped with a deficit of 6.8 million affordable housing units needed nationwide for extremely low-income families. Moreover, according to a recent Harvard study, one in four renters, or 11.2 million households, are “severely burdened by rents that took up over half their incomes.” These millions of renters living paycheck to paycheck are at significant risk of losing their home at the turn of a rainy day, with Americans of color, disabled Americans and queer and trans Americans at even greater risk. With so many folks on a razor thin edge of experiencing housing instability these days, all eyes are on Grants Pass.

Joining us to talk more about the case and the broader systemic issue of housing instability, homelessness, and what it would take to make a meaningful dent in both, is Jennifer Friedenbach, the Executive Director of the Coalition on Homelessness in San Francisco.

SCOTUS Will Decide If Homelessness Can be Punished

From the ACLU, this is At Liberty. I'm Kendall Ciesemier, your host.

A month ago, we visited one of our favorite spots, the library. You know, at the ACLU, we love a good library. So much so that we even spent a recent Saturday night at the Brooklyn Public Library, along with some 5,000 others, for their annual enrichment event, Night in the Library.

The theme for this year's event was Out of Darkness, and it included an all-night lineup of performances and conversations focused on what it means to face hardship head-on, and what we gain from confronting life's challenges with honesty, curiosity, and compassion, and understanding. When we were invited to host a conversation during the event, we knew immediately who we wanted to share with our neighbors in Brooklyn: Ian Manuel.

You might remember Ian from our episode back in January when he joined us to talk about juvenile life without parole, solitary confinement, and restorative justice. Ian is an author, poet, activist, and absolute visionary, working to change our criminal legal system after facing 18 years in solitary confinement himself and 26 years in prison, beginning when he was only 14 years old.

He knows firsthand what it's like to face darkness in life and move through it and he credits his practice of magical thinking for helping him. 

This is the idea that we used as the basis for our Night in the Library conversation. And with it being both National Library Week and National Poetry Month, right now, I can't think of a better time to share it.

So I invite you to cozy up with us between the bookshelves and enjoy the highlights from The Light of Magical Thinking, live from the Brooklyn Public Library.

Kids Sued Montana Over Climate Change—Here’s How They Won

Download our free app to listen on your phone