Attorneys for 18 young people in California are appealing to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. They claim that climate change impacts their lives more than it does for adults. These youths, aged 10 to 19, argue that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) prioritizes immediate economic concerns over the long-term health of children when making policy decisions.
In 2023, the non-profit organization Our Children’s Trust filed the original case in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. However, a federal judge dismissed it in February 2025, stating that the children hadn’t shown enough evidence to prove they were discriminated against based on the EPA’s policies. He suggested that climate-related harms affect everyone equally, regardless of age.
During the recent appeal in San Francisco, attorney Brianna Rosier Kabwika challenged the dismissal. She argued that allowing pollution directly harms children, who are not as resilient as adults. “The pollution in the air impacts their health now and in the future,” she explained.
Carbon dioxide plays a significant role in climate change and can linger in the atmosphere for over a century. Studies indicate that children are more vulnerable to environmental risks. For instance, injuries sustained during childhood can lead to different long-term consequences.
Christopher Anderson, representing the EPA, countered that the agency’s practice of discounting future consequences isn’t discriminatory. He stated that this approach is based on economic principles aimed at treating present and future effects equally.
At the hearing, some judges seemed skeptical, suggesting the youths hadn’t provided enough evidence to support claims of discrimination. Mat dos Santos, co-director of Our Children’s Trust, anticipates a decision in the coming months.
The young plaintiffs have reported real-life effects of climate change. They have faced wildfires, respiratory issues caused by air pollution, weeks out of school due to storms, and challenges finding clean water during droughts.
Our Children’s Trust is known for its previous high-profile case, Juliana vs. the United States, where the Supreme Court ultimately declined to hear the case. A related case in Montana found that state authorities must consider greenhouse gas emissions for energy projects.
The current case, Genesis vs. EPA, is unique because it focuses on discrimination regarding how the EPA evaluates costs and benefits. “When the government prioritizes present harms over future ones, it’s children who suffer the most,” dos Santos noted. “They lack voting power and are especially vulnerable to climate impacts.”
The Justice Department did not comment on this case, nor did the EPA provide feedback as the litigation is ongoing.
Additional Context
A recent survey conducted by the Pew Research Center found that 70% of Americans believe climate change is a critical issue affecting future generations. This aligns with concerns raised by these youths. Experts suggest that children’s health risks, including asthma and other respiratory diseases linked to pollution, are expected to rise as climate change continues.
As the world debates environmental policy, each court decision could set significant precedents for how youth rights intersect with climate action. It’s a developing story that highlights the urgency of addressing climate change today—not just for adults, but for the younger generations who will face its consequences tomorrow.
For a deeper look at the legal landscape regarding climate change, visit the EPA website or check recent findings on youth and climate impact from the World Health Organization.
