1
00:00:05,920 --> 00:00:10,200
Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome back to Drilled. I'm Amy Westervelt. Today

2
00:00:10,280 --> 00:00:13,920
Speaker 1: an update on a big climate case that's been ongoing

3
00:00:14,120 --> 00:00:18,239
Speaker 1: for about seven years now. It's probably the best known

4
00:00:18,280 --> 00:00:22,160
Speaker 1: of all of the climate cases, the Juliana Case, or

5
00:00:22,200 --> 00:00:27,240
Speaker 1: officially Juliana versus the United States. In this case, twenty

6
00:00:27,280 --> 00:00:31,960
Speaker 1: one young plaintiffs sue the US government over climate change.

7
00:00:32,120 --> 00:00:37,000
Speaker 1: It's often been misreported that they sued the government for

8
00:00:37,280 --> 00:00:42,760
Speaker 1: inaction on climate but that's not actually what they said.

9
00:00:42,920 --> 00:00:46,640
Speaker 1: In fact, the plaintiffs sued the government for effectively enabling

10
00:00:46,760 --> 00:00:52,200
Speaker 1: and accelerating climate change via policies that support and encourage

11
00:00:52,400 --> 00:00:56,840
Speaker 1: more and more fossil fuel extraction, so fossil fuel subsidies

12
00:00:57,000 --> 00:01:00,000
Speaker 1: or highway bills that make the country dependent on cars.

13
00:01:00,000 --> 00:01:04,920
Speaker 1: There's anything that basically encourages more emissions. That's not just

14
00:01:05,040 --> 00:01:09,000
Speaker 1: me being all well. Actually, although okay, fine, I do

15
00:01:09,160 --> 00:01:12,480
Speaker 1: like to do that sometimes, it is actually a really

16
00:01:12,480 --> 00:01:16,679
Speaker 1: important distinction. Here's Julia Olsen, the lead attorney on the case,

17
00:01:16,880 --> 00:01:17,560
Speaker 1: to explain.

18
00:01:18,080 --> 00:01:23,760
Speaker 2: So, the case is about the government's affirmative acts that

19
00:01:23,880 --> 00:01:27,160
Speaker 2: have put these young people in a position of danger

20
00:01:27,800 --> 00:01:31,520
Speaker 2: and continue to act in ways that are enhancing the

21
00:01:31,600 --> 00:01:34,920
Speaker 2: danger for young people. As a lawyer, I'm looking at

22
00:01:35,800 --> 00:01:40,360
Speaker 2: the party most responsible for causing the harm, and I'm

23
00:01:40,400 --> 00:01:46,600
Speaker 2: also looking at the remedy that's available to really stop

24
00:01:46,959 --> 00:01:51,440
Speaker 2: the climate emergency from worsening and to begin to redress

25
00:01:51,480 --> 00:01:55,760
Speaker 2: it so that we can protect these fundamental life support

26
00:01:55,840 --> 00:02:01,840
Speaker 2: resources for these young people. When I look as the

27
00:02:01,920 --> 00:02:06,200
Speaker 2: party most responsible, it is the United States government, historically

28
00:02:06,360 --> 00:02:13,600
Speaker 2: and presently because of the government's creation of promotion, of

29
00:02:13,680 --> 00:02:17,520
Speaker 2: support of a national fossil fuel energy system.

30
00:02:18,160 --> 00:02:22,919
Speaker 1: Some lawyers, especially those going up against the oil companies themselves,

31
00:02:23,240 --> 00:02:27,000
Speaker 1: have criticized the Juliana case for being too broad or

32
00:02:27,000 --> 00:02:30,320
Speaker 1: for taking the spotlight off of the fossil fuel industry.

33
00:02:30,520 --> 00:02:34,240
Speaker 1: But Olsen doesn't see the two as mutually exclusive, and

34
00:02:34,600 --> 00:02:38,120
Speaker 1: having covered the climate crisis for more than twenty years now,

35
00:02:38,400 --> 00:02:40,560
Speaker 1: I kind of tend to agree. Seems to me like

36
00:02:40,600 --> 00:02:44,120
Speaker 1: there's plenty of accountability to go around. The Juliana case

37
00:02:44,200 --> 00:02:48,480
Speaker 1: was originally filed in twenty fifteen, and in twenty twenty

38
00:02:48,520 --> 00:02:51,160
Speaker 1: one it looked like it was dead in the water.

39
00:02:51,639 --> 00:02:54,320
Speaker 1: Back in twenty twenty, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

40
00:02:54,600 --> 00:02:58,680
Speaker 1: ruled that the plaintiffs didn't have standing to bring this case,

41
00:02:59,160 --> 00:03:02,600
Speaker 1: So the plaintiffs asked for what's called an on banc rehearing.

42
00:03:02,960 --> 00:03:06,280
Speaker 1: That's a request that a full panel of judges, So

43
00:03:06,320 --> 00:03:09,799
Speaker 1: in this case, eleven judges look at a case, not

44
00:03:09,960 --> 00:03:12,960
Speaker 1: just the three who happened to review it the first time.

45
00:03:13,440 --> 00:03:16,280
Speaker 1: They asked for that in twenty twenty, and in early

46
00:03:16,320 --> 00:03:19,280
Speaker 1: twenty twenty one, the Ninth Circuit said, Nope, we're not

47
00:03:19,320 --> 00:03:22,720
Speaker 1: going to rehear it. Our decision is our decision. So

48
00:03:22,800 --> 00:03:24,919
Speaker 1: a lot of folks thought this case was done for,

49
00:03:25,200 --> 00:03:27,840
Speaker 1: but the Ninth Circuit issued a mandate to send the

50
00:03:27,880 --> 00:03:30,679
Speaker 1: case back to District court in Oregon.

51
00:03:31,160 --> 00:03:34,440
Speaker 3: So now it's back in front of Judge Aigan. And

52
00:03:34,720 --> 00:03:40,280
Speaker 3: at that point we decided the best path forward and

53
00:03:40,840 --> 00:03:44,920
Speaker 3: sort of the most efficient past path forward to get

54
00:03:45,040 --> 00:03:48,240
Speaker 3: to a ruling in the case and to get to

55
00:03:48,320 --> 00:03:50,880
Speaker 3: trial was to amend the complaint.

56
00:03:51,320 --> 00:03:53,760
Speaker 1: We're going to get into how the complaint was amended,

57
00:03:54,080 --> 00:03:57,760
Speaker 1: what's happened since then, and what's going on with youth

58
00:03:57,800 --> 00:04:01,080
Speaker 1: climate cases in general. Right now, that's all coming up

59
00:04:01,160 --> 00:04:13,640
Speaker 1: right after this quick break. Okay, So, back in twenty

60
00:04:13,680 --> 00:04:18,320
Speaker 1: twenty one, Olsen and her team filed an amended complaint

61
00:04:18,800 --> 00:04:21,400
Speaker 1: and the Juliana case got a second life.

62
00:04:22,080 --> 00:04:27,479
Speaker 3: So we amended our complaint and we changed the request

63
00:04:27,560 --> 00:04:32,520
Speaker 3: for relief. At the end, we took out the specific

64
00:04:32,600 --> 00:04:37,000
Speaker 3: request for the court to order a plan be prepared

65
00:04:38,040 --> 00:04:44,400
Speaker 3: on fixing the climate crisis, and we really refocused our

66
00:04:44,440 --> 00:04:50,200
Speaker 3: requests for relief on what's called declaratory judgment, so asking

67
00:04:50,279 --> 00:04:54,279
Speaker 3: the court in the first place to just declare the

68
00:04:54,320 --> 00:04:59,120
Speaker 3: constitutional rights and say whether the government has violated those

69
00:04:59,160 --> 00:05:04,200
Speaker 3: constitutional rights of these young people. And so the request

70
00:05:04,200 --> 00:05:07,920
Speaker 3: for relief focuses on that. It does also ask the

71
00:05:07,960 --> 00:05:12,400
Speaker 3: court to award plaintiffs any other relief that the Court

72
00:05:13,040 --> 00:05:17,520
Speaker 3: finds is appropriate or necessary after a trial is held

73
00:05:17,960 --> 00:05:22,960
Speaker 3: and all the evidence comes out. So we did that

74
00:05:23,040 --> 00:05:27,360
Speaker 3: and then we added new factual allegations to the body

75
00:05:27,400 --> 00:05:32,760
Speaker 3: of the complaint and we connected the dots better to say, hey,

76
00:05:33,120 --> 00:05:36,880
Speaker 3: you know, one big part of the injury here is

77
00:05:36,920 --> 00:05:41,440
Speaker 3: that the US government is saying to young people that

78
00:05:41,880 --> 00:05:45,560
Speaker 3: they don't have constitutional rights. They are saying that it's

79
00:05:45,680 --> 00:05:48,880
Speaker 3: totally within the law for them to continue to promote

80
00:05:49,000 --> 00:05:52,760
Speaker 3: fossil fuel energy, that that's okay to do. And so

81
00:05:52,800 --> 00:05:56,320
Speaker 3: there's a real controversy there. And if the court resolves

82
00:05:56,360 --> 00:06:01,400
Speaker 3: that controversy in favor of these young people and says

83
00:06:01,480 --> 00:06:05,679
Speaker 3: that that conduct is unconstitutional. You know that the fossil

84
00:06:05,680 --> 00:06:09,760
Speaker 3: fuel energy policies and practices of the United States government

85
00:06:09,839 --> 00:06:16,320
Speaker 3: are unconstitutional. Then that changes this whole legal relationship between

86
00:06:16,480 --> 00:06:19,560
Speaker 3: these young people and their government. And then the government

87
00:06:19,600 --> 00:06:23,920
Speaker 3: can't keep saying, oh, we can keep promoting fossil fuels,

88
00:06:23,920 --> 00:06:26,120
Speaker 3: we can permit all of this, we can lease public

89
00:06:26,200 --> 00:06:29,880
Speaker 3: lands for fossil fuel extraction. That's totally within our right.

90
00:06:30,680 --> 00:06:33,200
Speaker 3: They will be wrong at that point, and then things

91
00:06:33,240 --> 00:06:38,400
Speaker 3: will really begin to change. And so we said in

92
00:06:38,440 --> 00:06:42,760
Speaker 3: the complaint that if the court issues that declaration of

93
00:06:43,120 --> 00:06:47,839
Speaker 3: constitutional law, that the federal government will abide by it

94
00:06:47,960 --> 00:06:51,000
Speaker 3: and they will begin to change the way our energy

95
00:06:51,040 --> 00:06:53,000
Speaker 3: system is run in our country.

96
00:06:53,760 --> 00:06:58,240
Speaker 1: That actually feels like a pretty huge deal, especially as

97
00:06:58,240 --> 00:07:02,159
Speaker 1: we've been watching the Biden administry struggle to change any

98
00:07:02,279 --> 00:07:05,960
Speaker 1: policies at all with respect to climate and fossil fuels.

99
00:07:06,240 --> 00:07:08,520
Speaker 1: One of the first things the district court judge in

100
00:07:08,640 --> 00:07:12,440
Speaker 1: Oregon who's overseeing this case, Judge Aiken, did was to

101
00:07:12,640 --> 00:07:15,840
Speaker 1: order Olsen and her team to have a settlement conference

102
00:07:16,160 --> 00:07:19,120
Speaker 1: with the US Department of Justice to see if they

103
00:07:19,120 --> 00:07:22,120
Speaker 1: could work out a settlement agreement instead of taking this

104
00:07:22,280 --> 00:07:23,320
Speaker 1: case back to court.

105
00:07:23,760 --> 00:07:27,400
Speaker 3: June twenty third was our first settlement conference, and June

106
00:07:27,480 --> 00:07:30,920
Speaker 3: twenty fifth was the oral argument on the motion to amend.

107
00:07:32,200 --> 00:07:36,880
Speaker 3: So we've had one settlement conference and what happens in

108
00:07:36,920 --> 00:07:40,840
Speaker 3: those conversations has to be kept confidential. It's the way

109
00:07:40,960 --> 00:07:45,600
Speaker 3: settlement negotiations work. It frees the parties to talk freely

110
00:07:45,760 --> 00:07:51,080
Speaker 3: with the settlement judge and to not disclose that conversation publicly,

111
00:07:51,320 --> 00:07:52,800
Speaker 3: So I can't talk about the content.

112
00:07:53,640 --> 00:07:56,560
Speaker 1: That was Julie Olsen talking to me back in July

113
00:07:57,000 --> 00:08:00,360
Speaker 1: when the team had just had one settlement conference friends

114
00:08:00,480 --> 00:08:04,080
Speaker 1: and gone through oral arguments on this new amended complaint.

115
00:08:04,360 --> 00:08:07,040
Speaker 1: The reason I wanted to talk to her back then,

116
00:08:07,480 --> 00:08:09,720
Speaker 1: kind of in the middle of all of this process,

117
00:08:10,120 --> 00:08:14,520
Speaker 1: was that something really strange happened as that first settlement

118
00:08:14,600 --> 00:08:19,760
Speaker 1: conference was getting underway. The Attorney General of Alabama, joined

119
00:08:19,760 --> 00:08:24,080
Speaker 1: by a Republican attorneys general from sixteen other states, filed

120
00:08:24,080 --> 00:08:27,720
Speaker 1: a motion to intervene in this case. And that means

121
00:08:28,120 --> 00:08:32,080
Speaker 1: we got to talk about RAGA. The Republican Attorneys General

122
00:08:32,120 --> 00:08:36,600
Speaker 1: Association RAGA was started back in the nineteen nineties. As

123
00:08:36,640 --> 00:08:41,360
Speaker 1: a reaction to the tobacco litigation. That litigation had been

124
00:08:41,480 --> 00:08:45,200
Speaker 1: started mostly by Democratic attorneys general, and Republicans took a

125
00:08:45,240 --> 00:08:48,000
Speaker 1: look at the legal landscape in the country and realized

126
00:08:48,000 --> 00:08:52,160
Speaker 1: that they were vastly outnumbered by Democrats in state attorneys

127
00:08:52,240 --> 00:08:55,040
Speaker 1: general offices. That was something that was going to need

128
00:08:55,080 --> 00:08:58,240
Speaker 1: to change if they were going to avoid states going

129
00:08:58,320 --> 00:09:04,199
Speaker 1: after an industry ever again. So the attorney's general of Alabama, Texas,

130
00:09:04,280 --> 00:09:08,800
Speaker 1: and South Carolina came together and created RAGA, and then

131
00:09:08,840 --> 00:09:11,760
Speaker 1: they set about getting Republican attorneys general elected.

132
00:09:16,920 --> 00:09:18,640
Speaker 4: I had looked at this back when I was working

133
00:09:18,640 --> 00:09:22,080
Speaker 4: on the Senate Judiciary Committee in terms of the rise

134
00:09:22,120 --> 00:09:25,760
Speaker 4: of RAGA, the Republican Attorney's General Association, where we know

135
00:09:26,080 --> 00:09:27,440
Speaker 4: that it's a pay to play operation.

136
00:09:27,840 --> 00:09:30,720
Speaker 1: Lisa Greeves ran the Center for Media and Democracy for

137
00:09:30,800 --> 00:09:34,400
Speaker 1: years and now runs the research firm True North. She's

138
00:09:34,440 --> 00:09:37,000
Speaker 1: been tracking RAGA since its inception.

139
00:09:37,640 --> 00:09:42,000
Speaker 4: We know that it has had enormously distorting effect on

140
00:09:42,160 --> 00:09:46,439
Speaker 4: US law. It provides a mechanism for corporations to pass

141
00:09:46,480 --> 00:09:51,559
Speaker 4: money through to help attorneys general in ways that they

142
00:09:51,720 --> 00:09:55,320
Speaker 4: would not be able to individually solicit for their own

143
00:09:55,400 --> 00:09:59,720
Speaker 4: campaigns given their role their regulatory role over those very industries,

144
00:10:00,600 --> 00:10:03,439
Speaker 4: and that's been going on since RAGA was created back

145
00:10:04,600 --> 00:10:08,400
Speaker 4: more than twenty years ago. Now, RAGA now is not

146
00:10:08,440 --> 00:10:14,200
Speaker 4: just a recipient of donations from big oil and big

147
00:10:14,280 --> 00:10:19,080
Speaker 4: huge corporations, but it's also a major recipient of funds

148
00:10:19,360 --> 00:10:22,880
Speaker 4: in which the source is completely unknown to anyone other

149
00:10:22,920 --> 00:10:25,680
Speaker 4: than the person raising the money. The agenda of the

150
00:10:25,720 --> 00:10:29,040
Speaker 4: people who fund the RAGA the Republican Jurney General's Association,

151
00:10:29,679 --> 00:10:33,160
Speaker 4: and have been really attempting to work a legal revolution

152
00:10:33,280 --> 00:10:36,240
Speaker 4: through offices that we would otherwise consider to be independent.

153
00:10:36,760 --> 00:10:38,920
Speaker 4: It would be nice to have attorneys general of states

154
00:10:38,920 --> 00:10:44,040
Speaker 4: who were not so captive to advancing the interest of

155
00:10:44,120 --> 00:10:48,400
Speaker 4: Charles Coke, but unfortunately we are in an era in

156
00:10:48,440 --> 00:10:51,440
Speaker 4: which those interests have been dominating.

157
00:10:52,000 --> 00:10:55,800
Speaker 1: They successfully took the lead over Democrats several years ago

158
00:10:55,920 --> 00:11:00,640
Speaker 1: and transitioned to Phase two, coordinating on a meek briefs

159
00:11:00,679 --> 00:11:05,160
Speaker 1: and constitutional cases. You definitely know their work, even if

160
00:11:05,200 --> 00:11:07,720
Speaker 1: you've never heard of RAGA before. Today.

161
00:11:08,000 --> 00:11:10,520
Speaker 5: Now for an opposing view, we're joined by Ted Cruz.

162
00:11:10,600 --> 00:11:13,080
Speaker 5: He is the Solicitor General for the State of Texas,

163
00:11:13,320 --> 00:11:16,360
Speaker 5: and he drafted the amicus brief signed by Attorney's General

164
00:11:16,400 --> 00:11:19,360
Speaker 5: of thirty one states who say the DC handgun ban

165
00:11:19,559 --> 00:11:20,640
Speaker 5: should be struck down.

166
00:11:20,679 --> 00:11:23,560
Speaker 6: More than one hundred House Republicans on Thursday signed onto

167
00:11:23,600 --> 00:11:26,680
Speaker 6: an amicus brief in support of the Texas lawsuit aimed

168
00:11:26,720 --> 00:11:31,040
Speaker 6: at overturning the election result in four swing states Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania,

169
00:11:31,040 --> 00:11:31,800
Speaker 6: and Wisconsin.

170
00:11:33,640 --> 00:11:37,400
Speaker 1: So yeah, the same group that's been mobilizing against gun

171
00:11:37,440 --> 00:11:40,720
Speaker 1: control and abortion for years and that tried to get

172
00:11:40,800 --> 00:11:44,280
Speaker 1: the twenty twenty election results overturned all of a sudden

173
00:11:44,440 --> 00:11:48,360
Speaker 1: showed up in the Juliana case six years after the

174
00:11:48,440 --> 00:11:58,920
Speaker 1: case was filed. Now, normally, when someone files a motion

175
00:11:59,000 --> 00:12:02,200
Speaker 1: to intervene in a case, they're effectively joining that case

176
00:12:02,520 --> 00:12:06,120
Speaker 1: as a co defendant or a coplaintiff. But in this case,

177
00:12:06,160 --> 00:12:09,040
Speaker 1: the Republican ags don't want to be co defendants with

178
00:12:09,120 --> 00:12:12,440
Speaker 1: the US government. They only wanted to intervene in certain

179
00:12:12,520 --> 00:12:16,160
Speaker 1: parts of the proceedings. Here's Julia Olsen again.

180
00:12:17,040 --> 00:12:23,559
Speaker 3: They have a political agenda to protect gun rights, to

181
00:12:24,880 --> 00:12:31,280
Speaker 3: put limits on voting rights, to stop women from having

182
00:12:31,480 --> 00:12:38,760
Speaker 3: access to choices about their health and childbearing and abortion,

183
00:12:39,679 --> 00:12:45,000
Speaker 3: and they also have a climate agenda and on their

184
00:12:45,040 --> 00:12:49,800
Speaker 3: climate agenda is the Juliana case, and they have decided

185
00:12:49,840 --> 00:12:56,280
Speaker 3: that this case has a real shot at winning, I think,

186
00:12:56,720 --> 00:13:04,480
Speaker 3: and really establishing the constantitutional law around the extensive harm

187
00:13:04,559 --> 00:13:09,200
Speaker 3: being caused by this crisis and by energy policies. So

188
00:13:09,360 --> 00:13:14,079
Speaker 3: I think they realized that, oh, this case is going somewhere,

189
00:13:14,800 --> 00:13:19,320
Speaker 3: and as a result of that, they asked the district

190
00:13:19,320 --> 00:13:24,479
Speaker 3: court if they could come in and intervene for limited purposes.

191
00:13:25,760 --> 00:13:28,280
Speaker 7: And so this intervention motion that they filed.

192
00:13:28,360 --> 00:13:33,360
Speaker 3: It's really bizarre because typically when you have interveners, people

193
00:13:33,360 --> 00:13:36,439
Speaker 3: who want to come into a case, they either want

194
00:13:36,480 --> 00:13:38,320
Speaker 3: to come in as a plaintiff or they want to

195
00:13:38,320 --> 00:13:41,960
Speaker 3: come in as a defendant and they want to participate

196
00:13:42,040 --> 00:13:46,439
Speaker 3: in a case as a full party. And these attorney

197
00:13:46,480 --> 00:13:49,720
Speaker 3: generals from these eighteen states.

198
00:13:49,600 --> 00:13:51,640
Speaker 7: They aren't asking to come in as a party.

199
00:13:52,440 --> 00:13:56,120
Speaker 3: They want to come in as sort of an interlocky tour.

200
00:13:56,000 --> 00:13:58,640
Speaker 7: To just blow things up.

201
00:13:59,360 --> 00:14:03,280
Speaker 3: They said very explicitly, they want to come and have

202
00:14:03,320 --> 00:14:06,120
Speaker 3: a seat at the settlement table in order to prevent

203
00:14:06,559 --> 00:14:08,080
Speaker 3: any settlement from happening.

204
00:14:08,679 --> 00:14:12,080
Speaker 1: Keep in mind, this motion was filed in June twenty

205
00:14:12,160 --> 00:14:15,839
Speaker 1: twenty one, so the Biden administration was just getting going

206
00:14:16,040 --> 00:14:19,320
Speaker 1: and it maybe wasn't clear yet what his Department of

207
00:14:19,440 --> 00:14:22,920
Speaker 1: Justice was going to look like. These attorneys general had

208
00:14:22,960 --> 00:14:25,840
Speaker 1: no reason to intervene when it was a Trump DOJ

209
00:14:26,080 --> 00:14:29,680
Speaker 1: dealing with the Juliana case, but now they weren't so sure,

210
00:14:30,040 --> 00:14:32,840
Speaker 1: and they did not want the government settling with these

211
00:14:32,880 --> 00:14:37,320
Speaker 1: attorneys and effectively creating a constitutional right to a livable

212
00:14:37,360 --> 00:14:41,960
Speaker 1: planet in the US. According to Julia Olsen, they needn't

213
00:14:42,160 --> 00:14:43,040
Speaker 1: have worried.

214
00:14:44,200 --> 00:14:47,160
Speaker 3: I actually think the DOJ is not very different at all.

215
00:14:48,960 --> 00:14:51,400
Speaker 3: In talking to lawyers in a lot of other cases,

216
00:14:53,160 --> 00:14:56,840
Speaker 3: people aren't seeing a shift in the DOJ under the

217
00:14:56,840 --> 00:15:00,080
Speaker 3: Biden administration and under the leadership of Merrick Garland, and

218
00:15:01,560 --> 00:15:03,760
Speaker 3: I think they're still taking a lot of the same

219
00:15:03,800 --> 00:15:05,160
Speaker 3: positions they have taken.

220
00:15:05,680 --> 00:15:07,120
Speaker 7: And I actually think there's sort of a.

221
00:15:09,560 --> 00:15:17,600
Speaker 3: Dangerous backlash happening from what went on during the Trump

222
00:15:17,680 --> 00:15:23,040
Speaker 3: administration in terms of there was a lot of concern

223
00:15:23,360 --> 00:15:26,280
Speaker 3: that the president at the time Trump was using the

224
00:15:26,320 --> 00:15:31,480
Speaker 3: Department of Justice to achieve his personal needs.

225
00:15:31,960 --> 00:15:34,680
Speaker 7: You know that they the Attorney.

226
00:15:34,360 --> 00:15:37,120
Speaker 3: General Barber's acting as his private attorney kind of you know,

227
00:15:37,200 --> 00:15:40,120
Speaker 3: that was a lot of the public perception and the

228
00:15:40,120 --> 00:15:44,200
Speaker 3: concern of Congress, and that DOJ was not on the

229
00:15:44,280 --> 00:15:48,760
Speaker 3: up and up. And so you know, President Biden has said,

230
00:15:49,240 --> 00:15:53,200
Speaker 3: We're going to have clear rules and the Department of

231
00:15:53,400 --> 00:15:57,000
Speaker 3: Justice will have prosecutorial discretion, and I'm not going to

232
00:15:57,040 --> 00:16:01,240
Speaker 3: tell them who to prosecute, Right, that's their decision as

233
00:16:01,280 --> 00:16:02,120
Speaker 3: the people's lawyer.

234
00:16:03,200 --> 00:16:05,280
Speaker 7: And that all makes sense.

235
00:16:06,040 --> 00:16:11,400
Speaker 3: But when the Department of Justice is defending clients, like

236
00:16:11,560 --> 00:16:16,080
Speaker 3: different agencies that have been sued by people, then there

237
00:16:16,160 --> 00:16:20,600
Speaker 3: is a really important role for the executive branch, that

238
00:16:20,840 --> 00:16:24,160
Speaker 3: the political officials and the agencies and the White House

239
00:16:24,360 --> 00:16:27,920
Speaker 3: to play in how they want to be defended in

240
00:16:27,960 --> 00:16:28,680
Speaker 3: those cases.

241
00:16:30,000 --> 00:16:30,200
Speaker 7: Right.

242
00:16:30,280 --> 00:16:33,120
Speaker 3: So, as an attorney, you have an obligation to confer

243
00:16:33,200 --> 00:16:35,920
Speaker 3: with your client and make recommendations. But at the end

244
00:16:35,960 --> 00:16:39,320
Speaker 3: of the day, if your client wants to settle, or

245
00:16:39,320 --> 00:16:42,720
Speaker 3: if your client wants to admit facts, or your client

246
00:16:42,800 --> 00:16:46,720
Speaker 3: wants to take a particular legal position, the clients make

247
00:16:46,800 --> 00:16:52,440
Speaker 3: that decision, not attorneys by themselves. And so I think

248
00:16:52,560 --> 00:16:56,720
Speaker 3: the Department of Justice is kind of overreacting or overcorrecting

249
00:16:57,400 --> 00:17:04,919
Speaker 3: what happened previously. And and in many cases, the policies

250
00:17:05,240 --> 00:17:09,280
Speaker 3: of the Biden administration are not aligning with what the

251
00:17:09,320 --> 00:17:14,000
Speaker 3: Department of Justice is doing in cases that have a

252
00:17:14,119 --> 00:17:16,200
Speaker 3: huge bearing on those policies.

253
00:17:17,680 --> 00:17:21,280
Speaker 1: Ultimately, it was a mood point. Judge Aikins still hasn't

254
00:17:21,359 --> 00:17:24,639
Speaker 1: ruled on whether or not the RAGA attorneys can intervene,

255
00:17:24,840 --> 00:17:28,159
Speaker 1: nor has she ruled on the amended complaint, and in

256
00:17:28,200 --> 00:17:32,560
Speaker 1: the meantime, the settlement conferences have ended with no settlement.

257
00:17:33,119 --> 00:17:36,360
Speaker 1: I spoke with Olsen again this week to get an update.

258
00:17:37,960 --> 00:17:42,560
Speaker 3: You know, we have filed some unnoticed there's a supplemental

259
00:17:42,600 --> 00:17:45,399
Speaker 3: authority that have been some Supreme Court cases that have

260
00:17:45,520 --> 00:17:49,119
Speaker 3: been decided that we think are favorable to the mission

261
00:17:49,160 --> 00:17:53,440
Speaker 3: to amend. So you know, when something arises, some new

262
00:17:53,520 --> 00:17:57,160
Speaker 3: precedent that binds her, we it's on that her way.

263
00:17:57,240 --> 00:18:02,320
Speaker 3: But otherwise we are just waiting on her decision on

264
00:18:02,359 --> 00:18:04,760
Speaker 3: that mission to an end, which could come any day now.

265
00:18:05,119 --> 00:18:11,240
Speaker 3: And we also for about about five months, starting in

266
00:18:11,440 --> 00:18:17,879
Speaker 3: probably July, we were working with magistrate we're former magistrate

267
00:18:17,920 --> 00:18:22,800
Speaker 3: Judge Tom Coffin as our settlement judge and engaging in

268
00:18:22,840 --> 00:18:29,120
Speaker 3: settlement talks with the Department of Justice. Those became no,

269
00:18:29,480 --> 00:18:32,359
Speaker 3: you know, we're not fruitful, and so we ended those

270
00:18:32,440 --> 00:18:35,080
Speaker 3: talks in October.

271
00:18:36,480 --> 00:18:41,199
Speaker 1: Wasn't part of the Republican Attorney General's request was like

272
00:18:41,280 --> 00:18:43,800
Speaker 1: to be in on those talks.

273
00:18:44,040 --> 00:18:46,159
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, they wanted they wanted to be able to

274
00:18:46,600 --> 00:18:52,439
Speaker 3: have a seat at the settlement table, and that question

275
00:18:52,520 --> 00:18:55,840
Speaker 3: had not been decided, but there was, you know, no

276
00:18:55,960 --> 00:18:59,160
Speaker 3: need for them to have a seat at that settlement table.

277
00:19:00,080 --> 00:19:01,679
Speaker 7: The Biden DOJ is.

278
00:19:03,320 --> 00:19:09,120
Speaker 3: Continuing to do its job to fight this case, and

279
00:19:09,840 --> 00:19:14,720
Speaker 3: at this point, you know, has not shown any non

280
00:19:14,760 --> 00:19:19,399
Speaker 3: alignment with the position of the Trump administration, or for

281
00:19:19,440 --> 00:19:20,960
Speaker 3: that matter, or the Red States.

282
00:19:21,000 --> 00:19:25,200
Speaker 1: So that's interesting because it did seem like that might

283
00:19:25,240 --> 00:19:30,760
Speaker 1: have been part of the motivation for the Republican Attorneys general, right,

284
00:19:30,960 --> 00:19:33,760
Speaker 1: was that they thought, oh, a Biden DOJ is going

285
00:19:33,840 --> 00:19:37,080
Speaker 1: to settle with them, and that might be bad. But

286
00:19:38,440 --> 00:19:39,520
Speaker 1: they needn't have worried.

287
00:19:40,160 --> 00:19:41,440
Speaker 7: They mayn't have worried.

288
00:19:42,880 --> 00:19:45,040
Speaker 1: Now Olsen and her team are just waiting on a

289
00:19:45,080 --> 00:19:49,200
Speaker 1: decision from Judge Aiken about whether she's going to accept

290
00:19:49,280 --> 00:19:53,440
Speaker 1: this amended complaint and whether she'll allow the RAGA attorneys

291
00:19:53,520 --> 00:19:56,199
Speaker 1: to intervene. In addition to wanting to be part of

292
00:19:56,240 --> 00:19:59,840
Speaker 1: those settlement conferences, the Republican attorneys wanted to be able

293
00:19:59,840 --> 00:20:04,200
Speaker 1: to weigh in on the amended complaint. Everyone is eagerly

294
00:20:04,240 --> 00:20:07,879
Speaker 1: awaiting a ruling from Judge Eachin, which could come any day.

295
00:20:07,760 --> 00:20:08,920
Speaker 7: Now, all right.

296
00:20:09,119 --> 00:20:12,320
Speaker 3: I was hopeful that we would have had it before

297
00:20:12,600 --> 00:20:16,760
Speaker 3: the end of twenty twenty one. And I also know

298
00:20:16,840 --> 00:20:20,760
Speaker 3: that she has a very full docket that has obviously

299
00:20:20,800 --> 00:20:26,680
Speaker 3: been impacted by COVID. So we are waiting and hopefully

300
00:20:27,119 --> 00:20:30,760
Speaker 3: she cleared things out and Juliana will be next up.

301
00:20:31,200 --> 00:20:32,639
Speaker 7: Yeah, and I don't know.

302
00:20:32,680 --> 00:20:35,480
Speaker 3: I mean, if you've seen the projections that the projections

303
00:20:35,520 --> 00:20:42,720
Speaker 3: from the EIA are showing, you know, continued increases in

304
00:20:42,840 --> 00:20:46,800
Speaker 3: our oil and gas production, in our emissions, and of

305
00:20:46,840 --> 00:20:49,119
Speaker 3: course I think twenty twenty one was like, what a

306
00:20:49,200 --> 00:20:53,720
Speaker 3: six percent increase in emissions again, so we're headed in

307
00:20:53,760 --> 00:20:55,880
Speaker 3: that exact opposite direction we need to, which is why

308
00:20:55,960 --> 00:20:57,879
Speaker 3: we need to get back to court and get to trial.

309
00:20:58,760 --> 00:21:01,960
Speaker 1: In the meantime, several other youth climate cases have been

310
00:21:02,040 --> 00:21:05,600
Speaker 1: filed all over the world, including a few by Olsen

311
00:21:05,640 --> 00:21:09,080
Speaker 1: in her team, most recently in Mexico and Canada. Olsen's

312
00:21:09,119 --> 00:21:12,639
Speaker 1: happy to see it, but is also concerned about a

313
00:21:12,720 --> 00:21:17,280
Speaker 1: new and troubling trend. She's seeing cases pushing for governments

314
00:21:17,320 --> 00:21:20,480
Speaker 1: to adhere to the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement,

315
00:21:21,200 --> 00:21:24,880
Speaker 1: so limiting warming to between one point five and two degrees,

316
00:21:25,640 --> 00:21:29,640
Speaker 1: but also points out that those targets were a political compromise,

317
00:21:30,160 --> 00:21:33,240
Speaker 1: they're not what science indicates is actually safe.

318
00:21:34,119 --> 00:21:36,680
Speaker 3: And of course, for the most part, judges aren't going

319
00:21:36,720 --> 00:21:40,760
Speaker 3: to independently lead climate science, and so they're going to

320
00:21:40,800 --> 00:21:45,000
Speaker 3: rely on council to bring them the evidence, right, and

321
00:21:45,040 --> 00:21:49,200
Speaker 3: when the evidence is coming in and they're saying, you know, yeah,

322
00:21:49,280 --> 00:21:52,760
Speaker 3: to go with the Parish Agreement numbers, then judges are

323
00:21:52,800 --> 00:21:56,680
Speaker 3: doing that. And so they're actually chases now and there's

324
00:21:56,840 --> 00:22:02,679
Speaker 3: precedent building around the world that text human rights in

325
00:22:02,760 --> 00:22:06,920
Speaker 3: whatever iteration the claims are brought, but whatever where that

326
00:22:07,040 --> 00:22:11,400
Speaker 3: human rights law is in a particular country, whether it's

327
00:22:11,440 --> 00:22:14,600
Speaker 3: in an international treaty or in a constitution.

328
00:22:14,320 --> 00:22:17,240
Speaker 7: Or codified in some other place, they.

329
00:22:17,160 --> 00:22:19,720
Speaker 3: Are linking it now to those one point five and

330
00:22:19,720 --> 00:22:23,360
Speaker 3: two degrees seeing numbers, which is catastrophic.

331
00:22:22,800 --> 00:22:27,120
Speaker 7: For humanity and for young people. And you know, it's

332
00:22:27,200 --> 00:22:28,760
Speaker 7: my experience that most.

333
00:22:30,280 --> 00:22:33,360
Speaker 3: Lawyers and even a lot of journalists don't understand that

334
00:22:34,440 --> 00:22:39,479
Speaker 3: the foundational science is about Earth's energy and balance, right,

335
00:22:39,480 --> 00:22:42,000
Speaker 3: Because as long as we have an energy and balance

336
00:22:42,080 --> 00:22:44,359
Speaker 3: that the plants going to keep heating, right, And this

337
00:22:44,440 --> 00:22:47,840
Speaker 3: is like fundamental science, that climate that sciences.

338
00:22:47,520 --> 00:22:49,400
Speaker 7: Have interested for one hundred years or more.

339
00:22:50,440 --> 00:22:56,439
Speaker 3: And there's this just phenomenal group of interdisciplinary scientists working

340
00:22:56,480 --> 00:23:00,919
Speaker 3: together to continually define what that energy's number it is

341
00:23:01,200 --> 00:23:05,320
Speaker 3: and what level of CO two in the atmosphere would

342
00:23:05,520 --> 00:23:07,879
Speaker 3: correct that energy of balance, Like what do we have

343
00:23:07,920 --> 00:23:08,480
Speaker 3: to go back to?

344
00:23:09,480 --> 00:23:11,240
Speaker 7: And they continue to come.

345
00:23:11,200 --> 00:23:13,240
Speaker 3: Up with the number three fifty We have to get

346
00:23:13,280 --> 00:23:15,399
Speaker 3: below three fifty parts per million.

347
00:23:15,720 --> 00:23:16,040
Speaker 7: Yeah.

348
00:23:16,359 --> 00:23:18,840
Speaker 3: You know when I ask her any scientists the question,

349
00:23:20,280 --> 00:23:24,119
Speaker 3: what do you think one point five is safe? Like

350
00:23:24,200 --> 00:23:26,120
Speaker 3: do you think we can save these levels? And they're

351
00:23:26,119 --> 00:23:33,760
Speaker 3: all like no, it's it's totally dangerous in catastropha.

352
00:23:35,960 --> 00:23:39,480
Speaker 1: That sets a precedent not only for cases like Olsen's,

353
00:23:39,600 --> 00:23:43,800
Speaker 1: but for policy too. If courts start to codify those targets,

354
00:23:44,160 --> 00:23:47,360
Speaker 1: suddenly it becomes harder and harder to push for policies

355
00:23:47,400 --> 00:23:51,880
Speaker 1: that align with science and human rights rather than politics.

356
00:23:52,600 --> 00:23:55,560
Speaker 1: We'll be following that trend here and also on our

357
00:23:55,640 --> 00:23:59,560
Speaker 1: new spin off show Damages, which is launching next month.

358
00:24:00,119 --> 00:24:03,359
Speaker 1: On Damages, we'll be following the hundreds of climate cases

359
00:24:03,440 --> 00:24:06,080
Speaker 1: making their way through courts all over the globe at

360
00:24:06,080 --> 00:24:08,840
Speaker 1: the moment. Stay tuned after the credits for a quick

361
00:24:09,040 --> 00:24:12,760
Speaker 1: trailer with more on that show. That's it for this week.

362
00:24:12,840 --> 00:24:15,760
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening as always, and we'll see you next time.

363
00:24:21,080 --> 00:24:25,080
Speaker 1: Drilled is an original Critical Frequency production. Our producer is

364
00:24:25,160 --> 00:24:29,160
Speaker 1: Jules Bradley, mixing and mastering by Peter Duff. Our First

365
00:24:29,240 --> 00:24:33,000
Speaker 1: Amendment attorney is James Wheaton of the First Amendment Project.

366
00:24:33,880 --> 00:24:37,840
Speaker 1: Our artwork is by Matthew Fleming. The show is reported

367
00:24:37,880 --> 00:24:41,199
Speaker 1: and written by me Amy Westervelt. If you'd like to

368
00:24:41,200 --> 00:24:44,160
Speaker 1: support our work, you can do that at patreon dot

369
00:24:44,160 --> 00:24:47,320
Speaker 1: com slash Drilled. That will also get you access to

370
00:24:47,480 --> 00:24:51,560
Speaker 1: add free episodes and exclusive merchandise, so check that out.

371
00:24:52,119 --> 00:25:09,040
Speaker 1: Thanks again and we'll see you next week. All right,

372
00:25:12,920 --> 00:25:16,399
Speaker 1: You know what, there's a reason courtroom dramas stay on

373
00:25:16,520 --> 00:25:23,560
Speaker 1: TV forever. They're dramatic. You've got the salty lawyers. Well,

374
00:25:23,600 --> 00:25:26,720
Speaker 1: the First Amendment doesn't protect fraud and deception.

375
00:25:27,200 --> 00:25:31,399
Speaker 8: Why would you keep a failing company as a partner

376
00:25:31,720 --> 00:25:34,160
Speaker 8: to build your country's futurem and.

377
00:25:34,119 --> 00:25:38,439
Speaker 1: The expert witnesses they were giving millions of dollars to

378
00:25:38,560 --> 00:25:43,000
Speaker 1: other entities to support the idea that the Santo Breen

379
00:25:43,119 --> 00:25:43,840
Speaker 1: has with.

380
00:25:43,960 --> 00:25:44,679
Speaker 4: A house.

381
00:25:47,119 --> 00:25:50,760
Speaker 1: And look, people don't file lawsuits, at least the kinds

382
00:25:50,760 --> 00:25:53,199
Speaker 1: that you go to courtover for months and months and

383
00:25:53,240 --> 00:25:56,159
Speaker 1: months unless they feel really wronged and are ready to

384
00:25:56,200 --> 00:25:57,480
Speaker 1: fight reality.

385
00:25:57,560 --> 00:26:00,240
Speaker 7: What both sides really want is more power.

386
00:26:00,440 --> 00:26:00,679
Speaker 6: To me.

387
00:26:00,800 --> 00:26:02,840
Speaker 7: It was like, bring it on, you know, and I'm

388
00:26:02,880 --> 00:26:04,760
Speaker 7: not going to back down to fight. I'm not going

389
00:26:04,800 --> 00:26:07,199
Speaker 7: to back down, not when it's right, you know, and

390
00:26:07,200 --> 00:26:08,000
Speaker 7: not when people.

391
00:26:07,760 --> 00:26:08,399
Speaker 2: Are being hurt.

392
00:26:09,080 --> 00:26:12,480
Speaker 1: Right now, around two hundred court cases are making their

393
00:26:12,480 --> 00:26:16,840
Speaker 1: way through legal systems around the world with one goal

394
00:26:17,119 --> 00:26:20,399
Speaker 1: to hold companies and governments accountable for their roles in

395
00:26:20,440 --> 00:26:24,240
Speaker 1: the climate crisis. They hinge on different legal strategies, but

396
00:26:24,280 --> 00:26:31,560
Speaker 1: they're all fighting for one pointiff. It's all of us

397
00:26:32,040 --> 00:26:34,080
Speaker 1: and life on this planet.

398
00:26:36,720 --> 00:26:39,640
Speaker 4: Opponents of n Bridge Energies Line three oil pipeline that's

399
00:26:39,680 --> 00:26:41,760
Speaker 4: being replaced across northern Minnesota are.

400
00:26:41,680 --> 00:26:44,960
Speaker 3: Taking a unique legal approach to try to halt construction.

401
00:26:45,280 --> 00:26:48,720
Speaker 8: Thanks on Mobiles subsidiary pays no text. They've been giving

402
00:26:48,720 --> 00:26:52,240
Speaker 8: these texts bricks in addition to taking out eighty seven

403
00:26:52,280 --> 00:26:54,200
Speaker 8: point five percent of Diana's oil.

404
00:26:54,480 --> 00:26:56,439
Speaker 2: You're not allowed to lie when you know that you

405
00:26:56,520 --> 00:26:58,760
Speaker 2: have a dangerous product and you're lying about it.

406
00:26:58,840 --> 00:26:59,360
Speaker 6: That's a tour.

407
00:27:00,080 --> 00:27:01,440
Speaker 1: Sometimes they win.

408
00:27:01,800 --> 00:27:04,359
Speaker 8: The decision and Agenda was a huge breakthrough because it

409
00:27:04,400 --> 00:27:08,320
Speaker 8: was an example of a national court actually enforcing an

410
00:27:08,320 --> 00:27:11,639
Speaker 8: obligation of a government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at

411
00:27:11,640 --> 00:27:14,320
Speaker 8: the national level. No court had ever done that before.

412
00:27:14,640 --> 00:27:16,520
Speaker 6: You have to take them to court to enforce law,

413
00:27:16,920 --> 00:27:18,520
Speaker 6: and it looks like we're going to be able to

414
00:27:18,640 --> 00:27:21,199
Speaker 6: enforce travel law and travel court against the state. So

415
00:27:21,320 --> 00:27:25,240
Speaker 6: we use the ordinances and we find Shell and Conical

416
00:27:25,280 --> 00:27:29,399
Speaker 6: Phillips in Ordnance Court in Madison County, Illinois for putting

417
00:27:29,520 --> 00:27:30,840
Speaker 6: unzen on people's proferty.

418
00:27:31,440 --> 00:27:35,240
Speaker 1: Welcome to Damages a new kind of legal drama. I'm

419
00:27:35,280 --> 00:27:38,520
Speaker 1: Amy Westervelt and this is a podcast about a crime

420
00:27:38,560 --> 00:27:42,400
Speaker 1: against humanity and the quest to bring the world's biggest

421
00:27:42,440 --> 00:27:45,040
Speaker 1: climate criminals to justice.