Environment Policy Brief #186 | Jason Collins | December 30, 2025
Summary
A group of young activists from the landmark Held v. Montana case filed a new challenge against recent state laws. The filed petition challenges several statutes passed by Republicans that threaten the activist group’s victory in the Montana Supreme Court in 2024. According to the group, the new changes are violations of the state’s guarantee of a “clean and healthful environment.” The youth plaintiffs are preparing for a renewed legal fight and highlighting that climate harms are a constitutional issue.
ANALYSIS
The young group, led by Our Children’s Trust, a nonprofit public interest law firm, is asking the Montana Supreme Court to overturn three laws passed in 2025, saying they undermine the group’s 2024 victory.
In Held v. Montana, the court affirmed the state’s protection from climate-change-related harms and recognized that government actions contributing to climate change can violate constitutional rights. Now, the youth group argues that the new laws violate this result.
The first law targeted is Senate Bill 221 (SB 221), which revises the Montana Environmental Policy Act (MEPA) environmental review process. Under the new law, agencies are only required to inventory six specified greenhouse gases. The law also limits the state’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas pollution under the State’s Clean Air Act.
House Bill 285 (HB 285) makes it harder for agencies to deny permits for fossil fuel projects, even if those projects are harmful or worsen the climate crisis. The third law the group wants overturned is House Bill 291 (HB 291), which the group argues prevents state agencies from adopting stricter air quality standards than federal law.
Republican lawmakers cited improved clarity and efficiency in MEPA as reasons for the new laws. Still, Nate Bellinger, attorney for the plaintiffs, said in a press statement that “Montana’s leaders are openly defying the Constitution and the Supreme Court.” He added, “Held made clear that these youth are being harmed now and that Montana has a constitutional duty to protect them. Instead, lawmakers passed laws with the explicit intent to undermine the court’s ruling.”
The group is asking the court to hear the case as an original proceeding and to declare the 2025 CAA and MEPA provisions unconstitutional. In the petition, the youth shared that they were already experiencing ongoing harms as a result of the state’s refusal to comply with Held. The petition lists harms such as respiratory illness from wildfire smoke and fossil fuel pollution, property damage linked to extreme weather, and loss of access to forests and lakes.
Lawmakers argue that environmental regulation and expansive climate review can slow economic development. Reuters reported that earlier in May, when Montana’s Republican governor, Gregory Gianforte, signaled the new amendments, Gianforte said, “Last year, the Montana Supreme Court issued a series of rulings that if left unchecked would have impacted Montana’s energy sector at a time when Americans have seen electricity costs soar nearly 30 percent in the last four years.”
The outcome of this challenge has broad implications. The case challenges whether state legislatures can sidestep a state Supreme Court ruling and pass laws that contradict it.
Engagement Resources
- Our Children’s Trust
- Held v. Montana
- Governor Gianforte on environmental policy reform bills
- Senate Bill 221 (SB 221)
- House Bill 285 (HB 285)
- House Bill 291 (HB 291)