Latest news with #MontanaEnvironmentalPolicyAct
E&E News
28-05-2025
- Business
- E&E News
Montana lawmakers blunt group's historic court win on climate
Climate activists scored a pair of landmark legal victories in Montana over the past two years, giving momentum to similar youth-led efforts across the globe. Now state lawmakers have responded by targeting the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), which helped propel the young activists to a courtroom win after they argued the law violated their constitutional right to a healthy environment. Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte, a Republican, signed a package of bills into law this month that rewrite sections of the 1971 law. Flanked by Republican lawmakers and the state's top environmental appointee, Gianforte said the legislation 'reduces red tape and provides certainty to small and large businesses across our state.' Advertisement The measures that were added to the law restrict the scope of environmental reviews related to greenhouse gases and declare that the analyses are for informational purposes only and can't be used to deny permits. 'No more fantasyland ideas from climate crusaders who think Montana can run on solar panels and wishful thinking,' state Sen. Wylie Galt said at a Republican leadership press conference as the bills advanced. Environmentalists, however, said the changes put the state increasingly at odds with the courts. 'They are attempting to unwind what is constitutionally guaranteed,' said Derf Johnson, deputy director of the Montana Environmental Information Center. 'Once again, we're passing laws that are clearly problematic in terms of what our constitution requires.' Republicans in the state House and Senate acknowledged that the legislation was a response to the state's loss in Held v. Montana, which Galt called a 'present to radical environmental activists.' In the case brought by 16 young people, a state court declared in August 2023 that lawmakers had violated the Montana Constitution by barring state agencies from considering the climate effects of fossil fuel projects. At issue was the Legislature's decision in 2011 to revise MEPA to exclude consideration of out-of-state climate emissions when weighing whether to approve projects such as power plants. In-state climate emissions were excluded by the Legislature in 2023, before the case went to trial. Later that year, Judge Kathy Seeley of the 1st Judicial District Court in Montana struck down the two emissions-related measures that were added to the environmental policy act, finding that youth in the state have a 'fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment.' The 2023 ruling was a major victory for the young people, who made history by securing a win in the nation's first climate trial brought by young plaintiffs. It also boosted other climate litigation, including a similar lawsuit in Hawaii that was settled last June when state officials reached an agreement with the youth. And it was upheld in December by the Montana Supreme Court, which found that the delegates who wrote the 1972 Montana Constitution intended to provide 'the strongest environmental protection provision found in any state constitution.' Neither ruling sat well with Republican lawmakers — who had filed their own friend of the court brief urging the high court to reject the case. 'In that Held decision, it was kind of like we had — and I'm going to say something a little spicy — a bunch of little Greta Thunbergs, it seemed like,' state Rep. Randyn Gregg, a Republican, said on a podcast in January as the legislative session opened. Held v. Montana 'didn't just make headlines, it sent shock waves through Montana's economy,' said state Rep. Greg Oblander, a Republican, calling it an 'open invitation for activists to weaponize our environmental laws against the very industries that keep Montana running.' 'Weaponizing and litigation' Republicans proposed a package of bills to counter the court rulings, arguing that MEPA was intended to provide guidance to government officials — not serve as a means to deter coal, oil and gas projects. 'In the Held v. Montana court case, they tried to twist MEPA into something it was never meant to be — a tool to deny permits and block development,' state House Speaker Brandon Ler (R) said as Gianforte signed the package into law earlier this month. Ler, who sponsored one of the bills, said his legislation underscores the idea that environmental reviews are only procedural: 'It's a way to gather facts, weigh impacts and make informed decisions — not dictate them,' he said. 'We're making it clear that Montana's environmental policy is about informed decision-making, and not weaponizing and litigation.' Most Montana environmental laws begin with a reference to the state constitution, but Ler's bill strikes that language from MEPA. Another bill sets guidelines for MEPA assessments, narrowing the scope so that it does not not include greenhouse gas emissions beyond the boundaries of a proposed plant. That would mean a coal mine's exports wouldn't be a factor, for example. A third bill does not revise MEPA, but prevents the state from adopting any clean air standards that are more stringent than federal ones. A parade of fossil fuel interests, business groups and unions supported the measure. Federal standards 'are more than adequate,' Dan Brooks of the Billings Chamber of Commerce told lawmakers. Eva Lighthiser, one of the 16 young challengers who testified at the Held trial, told lawmakers that it was wrong to prevent the state from regulating harmful greenhouse gases. 'This bill goes against our constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment,' she said. 'This bill evades the state's responsibility to uphold our constitutional rights.' Other legislative efforts aimed at blunting Held were not as successful. Less than a month after the Montana Supreme Court upheld the Held decision, the court cited the decision in a ruling that determined state officials had not conducted an adequate review of a controversial gas-fired power plant. That ruling, along with the court's decision to uphold Held, prompted lawmakers to call for partisan judicial elections, as well as a new court that would focus on business interests. Neither of the measures passed the Legislature. Our Children's Trust, the public interest law firm that represented the young people in Montana, said it plans to stay active in the state. 'The disdain lawmakers showed for the decision really affirms it's a momentous decision and will have significant effects in Montana,' said Nate Bellinger, supervising senior staff attorney at the Oregon-based firm. He noted that lawmakers did not alter the constitution, which says public officials have a constitutional duty to protect people's right to a clean and healthful environment. 'We will continue to be there, to help represent youth and enforce and uphold the right to a clean environment,' Bellinger said. 'If that means follow-up litigation, that's what it means.'
Yahoo
01-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Governor signs suite of bills changing Montana's environmental laws
Gov. Greg Gianforte speaks before a bill signing ceremony for a suite of bills that make changes to Montana's environmental laws. (Micah Drew/Daily Montanan) Three state representatives joined Montana Gov. Greg Gianforte for a bill signing ceremony for five new laws making changes to the Montana Environmental Policy Act. 'At its simplest, MEPA is a process that ensures that we think about the potential environmental impacts of our decisions,' Gianforte said in remarks to press. 'Last year, the Montana Supreme Court issued a series of rulings that led us to develop solutions to reduce potential litigation and provide certainty to Montana businesses, large and small, that are trying to make a living here in our state.' The suite of laws came as a direct response to the decision in the Held vs. Montana lawsuit, in which a district court judge found that the state could not limit the analysis of greenhouse gas emissions during the environmental review process. When the Montana Supreme Court upheld the ruling last December, incoming Republican legislative leaders told the courts to 'buckle up' and brought a number of bills aimed at changing the judicial system as well as addressing the Held decision. 'In the Held v. Montana court case, they tried to twist MEPA into something it was never meant to be — a tool to deny permits and block development,' House Speaker Brandon Ler, R-Savage, said at the signing ceremony. 'With the signing of this MEPA reform package, we're making it clear that Montana's environmental policy is about reform decision making, not weaponizing and litigation.' Earlier during the session, House Democrats pushed back against many of the bills related to MEPA, including one brought by Ler. 'Montanans expect us to defend their Constitutional right to breathe clean air and drink clean water, and that's exactly what House Democrats did,' said Rep. Jonathan Karlen, D-Missoula, in a press release. 'But some Republican politicians are determined to erode what makes Montana the last best place. We will continue to fight those efforts every step of the way.' The Held lawsuit, brought by 16 youth plaintiffs from across the state, was the nation's first constitutional climate change trial. A district court judge in Lewis and Clark County sided with the plaintiffs in 2023, and in December 2024, the Montana Supreme Court upheld the decision. The court found in a 6-to-1 decision that Montana's constitutional guarantee of a 'clean and healthful environment' includes a stable climate system. 'Plaintiffs showed at trial — without dispute — that climate change is harming Montana's environmental life support system now and with increasing severity for the foreseeable future,' the order stated. In response to the Supreme Court's decision Democrats introduced bills that sought to strengthen MEPA's role in protecting the environment, although none passed. The majority of bills introduced, including the five signed on Thursday sponsored by Republicans, put sideboards on the environmental review process and clarified the state's existing laws. Speaker Ler introduced House Bill 285, which he said was designed to provide clarity and efficiency to MEPA. The bill emphasizes that MEPA is a tool for assessing environmental impacts, not a regulatory mechanism. 'House Bill 285 sets the record straight: MEPA is procedural,' Ler said. 'It's a way to gather facts, weigh impacts and then make informed decisions, not dictate them. This bill reaffirms the Legislature's intent.' Ler's bill passed both Legislative chambers along party lines. Other MEPA-related bills drew more bipartisan support. House Bill 270, introduced by Rep. Katie Zolnikov, R-Billings, updates MEPA language to remove the parts invalidated by the Held decision, alters the process if someone fails to comply with the act, and prevents state agencies from vacating permits without considering the economic effects. Her bill saw unanimous support in the House and saw only a handful of opponents in the Senate. Similarly, Senate Bill 221, carried by Sen. Wylie Galt, R-Martinsdale, also drew support from both parties. His bill directed the Department of Environmental Quality to develop guidance on greenhouse gas emission assessments while aiming to prevent industry and development from getting bogged down in litigation. 'Our next steps will be to develop that guidance document that will outline exactly how we will do greenhouse gas assessments for fossil fuel activities, as well as what parameters we'll look at for non-fossil fuel activities,' said Sonja Nowakowski, director of DEQ. 'These will be very open and transparent processes, and we look forward to engaging with the public and getting everyone's input as we move forward.' Gianforte also signed House Bill 291, which prevents the state from adopting more stringent standards for air pollutants than the federal government; and House Bill 466, which defines 'categorial exclusions' for projects that do not require environmental assessments, similar to the National Environmental Policy Act. Combined, Gianforte said the package of bills would help protect the state's environment while bolstering the economy. 'Left unchecked, the rulings would have impacted our energy sector at a time when Americans have seen the cost of electricity soar nearly 30% over the last four years,' Gianforte said. Anne Hedges, director of the Montana Environmental Information Center, criticized many of the bills Gianforte signed, especially SB 221 and HB 285, saying they reduced MEPA to a 'paper exercise.' 'Without the requirements in MEPA to fully analyze a project's impacts, the state does not have a mechanism to comply with the public's constitutional rights to know, to participate, and to have a clean and healthful environment,' Hedges said in a prepared statement. 'The people of this state will not stand for a loss of these constitutional rights, and so these bills will only result in conflict and wasted state resources.' Gianforte has signed 222 bills into law, as of Thursday afternoon, out of a total 878 passed by the Montana Legislature, according to the state's bill tracker.
Yahoo
27-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
State Supreme Court issues landmark ruling to uphold constitutional right for children: 'The ... law is affirmed'
The Montana Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in a case regarding environmental issues. According to the EHS Daily Advisor, the court upheld a lower court's ruling that the state constitution provides a "fundamental constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment [that] includes climate as part of the environmental life support system." The judgment comes from a case filed by 16 young people aged between 2 and 18. They sued the state, the governor, and multiple state agencies, alleging that their permitting of dirty energy providers in the oil and natural gas sector was contributing to the warming of our planet. They focused specifically on the Montana Environmental Policy Act, which they believed to be unconstitutional. MEPA stated that any environmental review of new energy deals, such as fracking or oil drilling, could not include actual or potential impacts of that activity that were "regional, national, or global in nature." In other words, companies would not have to acknowledge our heating planet when they discussed the environmental impact of new projects. The Montana Supreme Court upheld a lower court's ruling that the law was unconstitutional by a 6-1 majority. "We reject the argument that the delegates (to the Montana 1972 Constitutional Convention) — intending the strongest, all-encompassing environmental protections in the nation, both anticipatory and preventative, for present and future generations — would grant the State a free pass to pollute the Montana environment just because the rest of the world insisted on doing so," the court stated. "The District Court's conclusion of law is affirmed: Montana's right to a clean and healthful environment and environmental life support system includes a stable climate system, which is clearly within the object and true principles of the Framers inclusion of the right to a clean and healthful environment." Climate activists celebrated the decision and the impact it could have on similar cases nationwide. "It's a very strong opinion," said Michael Gerrard of Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, according to the Elko Daily Free Press. "It's one of the strongest opinions ever written on climate change. … This decision will be cited globally in cases in jurisdictions where there are environmental rights in their constitutions." Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
14-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Montana Legislature advances differing visions for MEPA's future
Speaker of the House Brandon Ler, R-Savage, speaks during a press conference on MEPA legislation on Feb. 12, 2025. (Nathaniel Bailey for the Daily Montanan) The Montana Legislature on Wednesday advanced four Republican-introduced measures that will tweak and redefine environmental policies in the state. Two of the measures that change the Montana Environmental Policy Act — one in each chamber — passed with bipartisan support, while a third bill brought by the Speaker of the House skirted through on party lines. The suite of environmental bills are a response to district and Montana Supreme Court decisions in the constitutional climate change lawsuit Held v. Montana, which upheld Montanan's constitutional right to a 'clean and healthful' environment and said limitations on MEPA fly in the face of the framers' vision. But that lawsuit 'ignored common sense and handed down an agenda-driven ruling,' according to Speaker of the House Brandon Ler, R-Savage. 'Let's be honest. This isn't about climate This is about control,' Ler said at a Republican press conference on Wednesday. 'It's about shifting decision-making power away from the people, away from their elected representatives, giving it to judges and activists who have no accountability to the voters.' Ler is carrying House Bill 285, which he said would provide clarity and efficiency to MEPA. 'What was designed to be a procedural tool for transparency and information decision making process over the years has been twisted into something it was never meant to be,' Ler said on the House floor. 'This bill streamlines the MEPA process, eliminates unnecessary red tape, and reaffirms its true purpose — providing clear, accurate, balanced information about environmental impacts, not creating endless hurdles for responsible development.' The Speaker said the bill would not weaken the statute, but opponents in the chamber pushed back on that notion. 'I know that every single person in this body knows that both jobs and the environment are important to Montana, but it's a hard, nasty conversation to have,' said Rep. Marilyn Marler, D-Missoula. 'Where do you put the balance between jobs and environment? Different people will put it in different places.' MEPA, Marler said, provides a structured way, in law, to have the hard conversations and facilitate conflict resolution. 'Unfortunately House Bill 285 tries to take out the conflict by taking out half of the conversation,' she said. Ler's bill clarifies that MEPA does not carry any regulatory weight, and prohibits a state agency from withholding, denying, or conditioning a permit due to any findings from an environmental analysis. It passed the House 58-42 on party lines. Another MEPA bill that drew a broader coalition was House Bill 270, introduced by Rep. Katie Zolnikov, R-Billings. Her bill updates the language of MEPA to remove the parts invalidated by the Held decision, alters the process if someone fails to comply with the act, and prevents state agencies from acting beyond their purview. HB 270 passed unanimously out of the chamber. The House also passed House Bill 291, brought by Rep. Greg Oblander, R-Billings, with two Democrats joining all Republicans. The bill would prevent an agency from enacting stricter air quality standards at the local or state level than what is currently in place federally. 'If the federal government sets a standard, that's the bar. We're not going to let state agencies or local boards move the goal post,' Oblander said during the press conference. 'We've seen what happens when agencies are left unchecked. Businesses that meet every federal requirement are suddenly hit with additional layers of regulations from state or local entities, rules that do nothing to improve the environmental outcomes, but everything to drive up cost, delay projects and kill jobs.' House Democrats vowed to keep fighting for Montana's environment, specifically against Ler's proposal. 'Montanans expect us to defend their Constitutional right to breathe clean air and drink clean water, and that's exactly what House Democrats did today. We supported a common-sense bill that upholds that right while providing clarity for businesses and workers under MEPA. But some Republican politicians are determined to erode what makes Montana the last best place,' said Democratic Whip Jonathan Karlen of Missoula. 'We will continue to fight those efforts every step of the way.' On the Senate side, Sen. Wylie Galt, R-Martinsdale, got a 37-13 vote on his Senate Bill 221, which he described as a 'Goldilocks bill.' SB 221 aligns MEPA with the Held ruling and directs the Department of Environmental Quality to develop guidance on greenhouse gas emission assessments, while not stymying industry and development. During the floor debate on his bill, Galt's bill earned support from a handful of Democrats. Sen. Derek Harvey, D-Butte, said that while MEPA can help protect the state's environment, litigation over MEPA can adversely impact workers and unions. He said SB 221 helps 'strike this balance.' While the bill requires greenhouse gas emissions for fossil fuel projects, Galt said the bill contains a catch. 'These assessments are information only. They cannot be twisted into tools to deny permits or slap on burdensome conditions,' Galt told the press. 'No activist lawsuits, no bureaucratic overreach, just facts.'
