Held v. State

After the Montana Supreme Court declined in December 2025 to exercise its original jurisdiction to consider claims that 2025 amendments to state environmental laws were unconstitutional under the court’s 2024 decision in <a href="https://www.climatecasechart.com/collections/held-v-state_2e16b7">Held v. State</a>, youth plaintiffs filed a complaint in Montana District Court seeking to have the amended laws declared facially unconstitutional. The plaintiffs also asked the court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the Department of Environmental Quality to prepare and develop a comprehensive plan for the prevention, abatement, and control of greenhouse gas emissions in Montana “that conforms with its affirmative obligation to maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment for present and future generations.” In addition, they asked the court to enjoin issuance of air quality permits for fossil fuel projects until the plan is developed absent “a showing that there is a compelling state interest for the project and the project is the least onerous means to achieve that compelling state interest.”