- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Washington
- /
- Washington v. Brockway
Washington v. Brockway
Geography
Year
2014
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2014
Status
Defendants convicted on trespass charges.
Geography
Docket number
5035A-14D, 5039A-14D, 5040-14D, 5041-14D, 5042-14D
Court/admin entity
United States → State CourtsUnited States → Washington District Court (Wash. Dist. Ct.)
Case category
Climate Change Protesters and Scientists (US) → Protesters (US)
Principal law
United States → State Law—Criminal Law
At issue
Prosecution of protesters who blocked a rail yard in Washington state to draw attention to climate change and the risks of coal and oil trains.
Topics
, ,  
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics 
Beta
01/15/2016
Defendants convicted on trespass charges.
Five individuals who blocked a rail yard in Washington state to draw attention to climate change and the risks of coal and oil trains were convicted of trespass in Washington state court on January 15, 2016. Before the trial, the judge in Snohomish County District Court initially dismissed the protesters’ necessity defense—in which the individuals argued that civil disobedience was necessary to address climate change and harms caused by oil trains. On reconsideration, however, the judge allowed the defense to present testimony in support of the necessity defense at the trial. The defense relied on the testimony of a climate scientist, a physician, a rail-safety specialist, an environmental policy researcher, and a former rail company employee. Ultimately, the judge directed the jury to disregard the testimony, saying that the defendants had not shown that they had exhausted legal means of advocating for changes in climate change and rail safety policies. The judge said from the bench that the defendants were “tireless advocates whom we need in this society to prevent the kind of catastrophic effects that we see coming and our politicians are ineffectually addressing.” The defendants were not convicted on charges of obstructing or trying to delay trains.
Other
01/06/2016
Motion filed for reconsideration of order precluding expert testimony.
Motion
01/06/2016
Defendants' motion to allow affirmative defense of necessity denied and expert witness testimony dismissed.
Decision
Summary
Prosecution of protesters who blocked a rail yard in Washington state to draw attention to climate change and the risks of coal and oil trains.
 Topics mentioned most in this case  Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Risk
Impacted group
Fossil fuel
Economic sector
Finance