Speakers from several tribes, along with environmental and climate advocacy groups gathered in the Capitol rotunda last week to ask lawmakers to pass bills following the landmark Held v. Montana ruling.Livingston high school student Ripley Cunningham was the emcee.”I will continue to fear for our future until crucial changes are made in the way we treat the Earth. I’m here because collective action is imperative to achieving that. I’m here to find solidarity in my fear,” Cunningham said.Sixteen young people sued the state for failing to act on climate change in the case affirmed by the state Supreme Court in December. The Held ruling struck down a law passed during the 2023 legislative session barring state environmental regulators from considering climate impacts or greenhouse gas emissions as part of their environmental assessments.Senate President Matt Regier told reporters at the start of this session he wasn’t happy with the ruling.”I still think the judiciary had a legislative hearing there and the judge acted as the House, Senate and governor all together. I think that’s atrocious.”Regier says it’s now up to the Legislature to determine the next steps for the Montana Environmental Policy Act, or MEPA. The policy was at the center of the Held case.Ellis JuhlinHundreds of people rallied at the Capitol on January 24, 2025 to ask state lawmakers to pass legislation to protect the environment for future generations.
Two bills that have been introduced would change code so it’s in line with the Held decision.Web: House Bill 229 carried by Flathead Democrat Debo Powers, and House Bill 270 from Billings Republican Katie Zolnikov, would both remove language the court found unconstitutional from state code.Other bills, like House Bill 291 carried by Billings Republican Greg Oblander would weaken air quality permitting standards. House Bill 285 from Republican House Majority Leader Brandon Ler, that would make it harder to legally challenge agencies’ environmental reviews.But University of Montana constitutional law professor Constance Van Kley says those laws challenge the core of the Held decision, which says the state Constitution provides for a clean and healthful environment, which includes a stable climate.The likely effect of Held is to require the reviewing agency to consider the climate impacts, but not to make a particular decision based on its consideration.Three of the bills responding to Held have been introduced but have not yet passed out of committee. There are more draft requests for bills changing the Montana Environmental Policy Act that could be heard in the coming weeks.
