Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database
Collection

Conservation Law Foundation v. Maine Department of Environmental Protection

Conservation Law Foundation v. Maine Department of Environmental Protection 

AP-24-22Me. Super. Ct.4 entries
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
12/06/2024
Decision
Motion to dismiss granted.
On December 6, 2024, a Maine trial court ruled that Conservation Law Foundation, Sierra Club, and Maine Youth Action lacked standing to bring their lawsuit asserting that the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and the Maine Board of Environmental Protection acted arbitrarily and capriciously, as well as unlawfully under Maine’s 2019 climate law, by failing to adopt transportation decarbonization rules. The court first concluded that the organizations did not have standing to sue in their own right because the alleged harm to their missions and advocacy efforts was not a particularized injury. The court further concluded that the plaintiffs did not allege sufficiently particularized injury to their members’ property rights, pecuniary interests, health, or personal rights. The court also rejected the argument that the organizations’ members had taxpayer standing to seek preventive relief against the State defendants for violating a statewide public duty.
07/18/2024
Opposition
Plaintiffs filed opposition to motion to dismiss.
06/21/2024
Motion To Dismiss
Motion to dismiss filed.
04/19/2024
Petition
Petition for judicial review filed.
Conservation Law Foundation, Sierra Club, and Maine Youth Action filed a lawsuit in Maine Superior Court seeking to compel the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and Board of Environmental Protection to adopt regulations to ensure compliance with Maine’s 2019 climate law, which requires reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 45% below the 1990 level by 2030 and by at least 80% by 2050. The petitioners alleged that the defendants had adopted only two rules to implement the climate law’s requirements and no rules aimed at transportation emissions, which comprise 54% of emissions. The petitioners further alleged that the Board had rejected three transportation decarbonization rules, including the Advanced Clean Cars II Program, a rule promulgated by the California Air Resources Board that the Maine Governor’s Energy Office called “critically important” in a clean transportation roadmap published in December 2021. The Board voted not to adopt the Advanced Clean Cars II rule on March 20, 2024. The petitioners asked the court to declare that the defendants were “under an existing and ongoing statutory obligation … to adopt rules ensuring compliance with the climate mandates” and to adopt rules that are consistent with Maine’s 2020 climate action plan and that “prioritize emissions from the sectors that are the greatest contributors.” The petitioners also sought a declaration that the failure to adopt the Advanced Clean Cars II rule was arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion, as well as unlawful under the 2019 climate law. In addition, they asked the court to order the Board to adopt rules ensuring compliance with the 2019 climate law’s mandates and to adopt, by November 1, 2024, the Advanced Clean Cars II rule, or an alternative rule to reduce transportation emissions.