MISSOULA — After two days of hearings, 19-year-old Eva Lighthiser expressed optimism about her legal challenge against the Trump administration’s climate policies. The case, named Lighthiser v. Trump, involves a group of plaintiffs arguing that three executive orders violate their Fifth Amendment rights. “It’s really affirming to have our voices heard in court,” said Lighthiser.
Lighthiser, from Livingston, leads the challenge against energy orders that the plaintiffs claim infringe on their rights to life and liberty. Judge Dana Christensen, overseeing the case, has yet to decide on blocking these orders, expressing concern about the practicality of such a move.
Federal attorneys urged dismissal, arguing the case is a policy request without legal basis. Trump’s orders aim to reduce regulatory burdens on energy development and prioritize coal-fired electricity to address energy capacity concerns. Julia Olson from Our Children’s Trust argued that blocking the orders would be feasible.
Expert testimony highlighted the risks posed by fossil fuels, with Lori Byron warning of the health impacts on children. She cited a study showing reduced pediatric asthma cases after a coal plant closure.
Geoffrey Heal, an economist, stated that renewable energy doesn’t raise prices and criticized the necessity of the executive orders. Nicole Hughes detailed how these orders hinder wind and solar projects, affecting energy reliability.
Attorney Michael Sawyer defended the orders, challenging the plaintiffs’ standing and arguing that courts shouldn’t interfere with policy reconsiderations. Montana’s attorney Justin Smith worried about potential legal costs and project impacts if the injunction proceeds.
Our Children’s Trust lawyer Andrea Rodgers was encouraged by Christensen’s attention during the hearings. “He engaged some of our witnesses with questions of his own,” Rodgers said, noting the complexities involved. The judge has not announced when he will rule.
—
Read More Montana News
