Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database
Collection

Navahine F. v. Hawai‘i Department of Transportation

Navahine F. v. Hawai‘i Department of Transportation 

1CCV-22-0000631Haw. Cir. Ct.10 entries
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
06/20/2024
Settlement Agreement
Settlement approved by court.
On June 20, 2024, the Hawai‘i Circuit Court approved a settlement resolving claims brought by youth plaintiffs against the Hawai‘i Department of Transportation and other State defendants (HDOT). The plaintiffs alleged that the establishment, operation, and maintenance of Hawai‘i’s state transportation system violates the Hawai‘i Constitution’s public trust doctrine and right to a clean and healthful environment. The settlement agreement—which was approved four days before a trial was scheduled to begin—includes a “Recognition of Rights” that enumerates the plaintiffs’ rights and the defendants’ obligations under the Hawai‘i Constitution, state statutes, and Hawai‘i Supreme Court precedent. The agreement requires HDOT to take actions to achieve a “Zero Emissions Target” for ground and sea and air interisland transportation sectors by 2045, as required by a 2018 law. HDOT must set interim greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets for 2030, 2035, and 2040 and must develop “a concrete and comprehensive statewide plan” by May 2025 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with this schedule. The settlement agreement specifies elements that the plan must include and provides for specific opportunities for the youth plaintiffs and the public to provide comments and feedback on the plan and on annual updates. The agreement also requires development and use of “a process and criteria for evaluating, selecting, and prioritizing projects” in transportation planning, as well as a “an objective, scientifically-based methodology to assess and report the total, long-term [greenhouse gas] emission and [vehicle miles traveled] impacts of each infrastructure project.” In addition, the agreement requires that HDOT establish a climate change mitigation unit within HDOT and a volunteer youth advisory council. The agreement includes commitments by HDOT to take actions to accelerate expansion of the electric vehicle charging network; accelerate expansion of multimodal transportation choices; develop and implement policies to achieve zero emissions; and increase efforts to sequester carbon. The agreement establishes dispute resolution procedures; once a party complies with these procedures, the party may bring a motion in the Circuit Court to enforce the agreement. The court retains jurisdiction of the case until the earlier of December 31, 2045 or the date on which the Zero Emissions Target is achieved.
08/03/2023
Press Release
Trial dates set during hearing.
On August 3, 2023, youth plaintiffs’ attorneys announced that a Hawai‘i court had scheduled the trial in their climate change case against the Hawai‘i Department of Transportation for June 24-July 12, 2024.
04/26/2023
Motion
Motion filed by plaintiffs to maintain trial date.
04/06/2023
Decision
Motion to dismiss denied.
A Hawai‘i Circuit Court denied a motion to dismiss youth plaintiffs’ lawsuit asserting that the establishment, operation, and maintenance of Hawai‘i’s fossil fuel-based transportation system violates the Hawai‘i Constitution’s public trust doctrine and right to a clean and healthful environment. The lawsuit was brought against the Hawai‘i Department of Transportation, its director, the governor and the State of Hawai‘i. The court did not determine whether “the climate” is a public trust resource, finding that it was sufficient that the plaintiffs argued that “deteriorating climate impacts our natural resources.” The court further found that the defendants had an obligation to “take steps to maintain their assets to keep them from falling into disrepair” and rejected any argument that because greenhouse gas emissions are “too big a problem,” the State did not have a “trust obligation to reasonably monitor and maintain our natural resources by reducing our [greenhouse gas ] emissions and establishing and planning alternatives to a fossil-fuel heavy transportation system.” The court also rejected a contention that statutes limited the public trust doctrine, requiring dismissal of the claim. Regarding the claim asserting a breach of the Hawai‘i Constitution’s right to a clean and healthful environment, the court concluded that Hawai‘i laws addressing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, reducing fossil fuels in transportation, and promoting alternative fuels and energy efficiency were laws relating to environmental quality (and therefore were relevant to defining the constitutional right). The court further concluded the laws required “timely planning and action, not meaningless or purely aspirational goals” and that the youth plaintiffs’ complaint was “replete with additional allegations that Defendants’ actions do not comply with the Legislature’s statutory directives.” In addition, the court found that the plaintiffs alleged harms that “are current, ongoing, and getting worse.” The court noted that the Hawai‘i Supreme Court had highlighted the harms of lack of action on greenhouse gases and fossil fuels in its March 2023 opinion regarding the constitutional duty to ensure a life-sustaining climate system. The court also rejected arguments that the youth plaintiffs lacked standing and that their claims raised a political question. Regarding standing, the court noted that the federal court “injury-in-fact” test did not apply and found that the plaintiffs’ allegations “that they stand to inherit a world with severe climate change and the resulting damage to our natural resources” established “concrete” interests. The court also found that the declaratory judgment sought by the plaintiffs “will help resolve the parties’ different views of what the legislature and Constitution require.” The court found that the defendants’ invocation of the political question doctrine was premature and that the issue likely would not arise “until a specific motion for injunctive relief is filed.”