Technologies
Gen Z Prevailed in a Climate Lawsuit. More Youth Trials Are on the Way
Young people fighting for a better future for the planet are beginning to discover that the law is on their side.
For two weeks in June, a Montana court heard from young people – 16 in total, ages 5 to 22 – and their families about the toll of extreme weather events caused by climate change on their health and other aspects of their lives.
They argued that the state of Montana had violated their constitutional rights to, among other things, a clean and healthful environment, by supporting a fossil fuel energy system and by failing to take action that would protect them against the harmful effects of climate change.
On Monday, after a two-month wait, they learned that they’d won.
In a landmark victory, Judge Kathy Seeley ruled in their favor, concluding in a 103-page decision that they’d proved significant injuries had occurred. Not only that, the decision in Held v. Montana said the case, launched in 2020, had shown that the Montana state government had been instrumental in causing these injuries and would be required to make changes to its conduct.
It’s a ruling that will likely have repercussions well beyond Montana’s state lines.
«We set the precedent not only for the United States, but for the world,» said 18-year-old Kian Tanner from Bigfork, Montana, in a statement.
It’s also another sign that Generation Z is finding new and forceful ways to make itself heard on climate issues. Gen Zers are using legal systems in the US and other countries to try to stem the damage being done by the burning of fossil fuels and the resulting greenhouse gases and to hold the responsible parties accountable.
Most young people are encouraged to avoid brushes with the legal system, but the plaintiffs in Montana, underpinned by legal team Our Children’s Trust, join a growing number of youth from around the world who are wielding the law to pressure governments into taking more radical action on climate.
Now that we’re regularly facing the impacts of human-caused climate change in our daily lives in the form of extreme weather events or breathing in smoke from forest fires, it’s easy to feel overwhelmed or powerless. But there are things we can do: recycle, cut down on car use, install solar panels and heat pumps, vote eco-friendly and support environmental campaigns. And litigate.
The Montana plaintiffs didn’t seek financial damages for the harms they’ve suffered due to climate change. Instead they wanted to change the current system – they sued over a law that prohibited the state from considering greenhouse gas emissions or climate change impacts when greenlighting fossil fuel projects.
«Young people are turning to court because they know that this isn’t about just the consumer choices that people make,» said Andrea Rodgers, senior litigation attorney at Our Children’s Trust, in an interview ahead of the verdict being issued. «This is about how we get energy, how we transfer goods, those kinds of systemic issues that governments really control.»
Monday’s decision is a game-changer, said Julia Olson, chief legal counsel and executive director with Our Children’s Trust, in a statement. «More rulings like this will certainly come.»
Here’s a look at some other prominent climate cases being driven by young people.
Kids vs. climate change
Way back in 2015, 21 young people filed a constitutional climate lawsuit against the federal government. They asserted that through government actions that cause climate change, it has violated the youngest generation’s constitutional rights to life, liberty and property.
Known as Juliana v. The United States, the federal case (also backed by Our Children’s Trust) was delayed by opposition from the Department of Justice under the Trump administration. Then, in June of this year, US District Court Judge Ann Aiken ruled that it can proceed to trial. Now the organizations supporting the young plaintiffs are asking the Biden administration not to delay the trial further.
«It’s long past time for the Department of Justice to end its opposition to the Juliana plaintiffs and youth climate justice,» said Zanagee Artis, founder and executive director of youth activist nonprofit Zero Hour. «Young Americans have the right to be heard by our nation’s courts, the branch of our government that has a duty to protect our constitutional right to a livable planet.»
For many years, courts were reluctant to hear and decide the merits of climate cases, said Rodgers. Just getting the Montana case to trial was a victory that signified «a real moment of change,» she added, that’s paved the way for trials to proceed both in the Juliana case and in another case that Our Children’s Trust is pursuing, in Hawaii.
Rodgers says the courts are now opening their doors to American youth because of the increasingly real and visceral impacts of climate change. «That does make a difference,» she said, «because it takes the injuries that the youth are experiencing … from being hypothetical to being real and tangible.»
Youth victories in and out of court
In the climate justice movement, young activists are key players in moving the needle on key issues, through protests, direct action and dialogues with politicians. But the combination of youth activism and legal action can be an especially potent mix.
In 2018, Indigenous climate activist and environmental engineer Yurshell Rodriguez, now 28, was one of 25 young people who successfully sued the government of Colombia for failing to reduce deforestation of the Amazon rainforest, thereby threatening their fundamental rights to a healthy environment, life, health, food and water. The lawsuit resulted in an intergenerational pact that meant the government had to consult with the plaintiffs, the affected communities and scientists to reduce deforestation in the Amazon.
«Activism sends a powerful message that the younger generation refuses to inherit a world plagued by environmental degradation and the consequences of inaction,» Rodriguez said in an interview. «But through lawsuits, we are raising awareness, mobilizing public support and challenging the status quo, compelling governments to prioritize sustainable policies, reduce carbon emissions and protect the planet for future generations.»

Young plaintiffs shouldn’t get discouraged if a judge rules against them, Rodriguez says – the awareness and public support a legal case can drive is also a positive result, which can in turn force the government’s hand.
In Europe in 2021, the People’s Climate Case, brought by 10 families including their children, was ultimately ruled inadmissible on a technicality by the Court of Justice of the European Union, but it spurred the EU to ramp up its fossil fuel reduction targets. «It’s all about kind of embarrassing the government into action,» said British human rights barrister Marc Willers.
There are always benefits to having young people tell their stories in open court alongside expert evidence and see states fail to defend their inaction, says Rodgers. «Even though there have been defeats and decisions that we consider to be unfavorable, it is still moving the ball forward.»
How to sue your government
No matter your age, it can be a «daunting prospect» to take on the state, even more so a fossil fuel giant that will throw everything it has at fighting your claim and attempting to discredit you, said Willers, who’s worked on a number of high-profile international environmental cases.
To bring a legal case, you’re going to need the support of sympathetic lawyers and an NGO or grassroots climate organization that knows the system and provides the necessary support, Willers said. He also advises forming a group, as the young people in the Montana and Juliana cases did, rather than going it alone, and finding a legal team that’s willing to spend time getting to understand your perspective.
In his work, Willers said, he’s found there are «real benefits to having young people involved in the litigation.» Children and youth can bring energy, positivity and unique viewpoints into the courtroom as representations of the future generations inheriting the Earth. They’re also often more knowledgeable about the issues than people give them credit for.

Young people often have a sophisticated understanding of the science combined with a sense of frustration and impatience, said Rodgers. She cited the example of a climate activist who achieved worldwide renown in her teens. «Greta Thunberg probably expresses that most prominently, but she’s simply expressing the feelings of youth universally, in my experience.»
Mounting global pressure
There’s no sign of youth-led climate litigation slowing down, what with legal wins in Colombia and Montana; the first lawsuit involving individuals versus the federal government underway in the US; and a major trial due to kick off in France this September based on six children and young adults suing 32 European countries.
As in the Montana case, the plaintiffs in that European case, all from Portugal, aren’t seeking financial damages – even though they’re entitled to. Instead, they’re pursuing a legally binding decision from the European Court of Human Rights that would require the countries to take action against climate change.
The more these cases occur around the world, the more they build momentum and make the voices of youth harder to ignore, said Rodgers. «What’s really cool is seeing these young people inspiring one another and building off of one another’s work.»
Such cases are strengthened by the fast-evolving field of attribution science, which can increasingly draw direct lines between specific emissions and the harms they’re causing. Lawsuits lodged by individuals against companies or institutions will only continue to get stronger and more frequent as our understanding of the science of climate change improves, Willers predicts.
When taking the legal route, progress can be painfully slow, as the young people in the now 8-year-old Juliana case have discovered. Some of them are no longer the kids they were at the time the suit was filed. But with children more aware than ever of growing up in a world threatened by climate change, there will be no shortage of young people willing to fight for their rights.
Rodriguez, who’s been there herself, is supportive of other young people considering demanding accountability and pushing for new measures through legal action. She encourages them to see themselves as «custodians of the future» who can leverage their voices and rights to hold those in power responsible for safeguarding the environment.
«To all the young people I will just say: Our actions inspire hope and serve as a reminder that collective efforts are essential in tackling the complex challenges of this climate crisis,» she says. «Be the change you want to see.»
Technologies
A $20K Humanoid Robot to Help Around the House? The Price Isn’t the Only Caveat
The new Neo robot from 1X is designed to do chores. It’ll have to learn a lot from you — and about you.
It stands 5 feet, 6 inches tall, weighs about as much as a golden retriever and costs near the price of a brand-new budget car.
This is Neo, the humanoid robot. It’s billed as a personal assistant you can talk to and eventually rely on to take care of everyday tasks, such as loading the dishwasher and folding laundry.
Neo doesn’t work cheap. It’ll cost you $20,000. And even then, you’ll still have to train this new home bot.
If that sounds enticing, preorders are now open (for a mere $200 down). You’ll be signing up as an early adopter for what Neo’s maker, a California-based company called 1X, is calling a «consumer-ready humanoid.» That’s opposed to other humanoids under development from the likes of Tesla and Figure, which are, for the moment at least, more focused on factory environments.
Neo is a whole order of magnitude different from robot vacuums like those from Roomba, Eufy and Ecovacs, and embodies a long-running sci-fi fantasy of robot maids and butlers doing chores and picking up after us. If this is the future, read on for more of what’s in store.
Don’t miss any of our unbiased tech content and lab-based reviews. Add CNET as a preferred Google source.
What the Neo robot can do around the house
The pitch from 1X is that Neo can do all manner of household chores: fold laundry, run a vacuum, tidy shelves, bring in the groceries. It can open doors, climb stairs and even act as a home entertainment system.
Neo appears to move smoothly, with a soft, almost human-like gait, thanks to 1X’s tendon-driven motor system that gives it gentle motion and impressive strength. The company says it can lift up to 154 pounds and carry 55 pounds, but it is quieter than a refrigerator. It’s covered in soft materials and neutral colors, making it look less intimidating than metallic prototypes from other companies.
The company says Neo has a 4-hour runtime. Its hands are IP68-rated, meaning they’re submersible in water. It can connect via Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and 5G. For conversation, it has a built-in LLM, the same sort of AI technology that powers ChatGPT and Gemini.
The primary way to control the Neo robot will be by speaking to it, just as if it were a person in your home.
Still, Neo’s usefulness today depends heavily on how you define useful. The Wall Street Journal’s Joanna Stern got an up-close look at Neo at 1X’s headquarters and found that, at least for now, it’s largely teleoperated, meaning a human often operates it remotely using a virtual-reality headset and controllers.
«I didn’t see Neo do anything autonomously, although the company did share a video of Neo opening a door on its own,» Stern wrote.
1X CEO Bernt Børnich told her that Neo will do most things autonomously in 2026, though he also acknowledged that the quality «may lag at first.»
What you need to know about Neo and privacy
Part of what early adopters are signing up for is to let Neo learn from their environment so that future versions can operate more independently.
That learning process raises privacy and trust questions. The robot uses a mix of visual, audio and contextual intelligence — meaning it can see, hear and remember interactions with users throughout their homes.
«If you buy this product, it is because you’re OK with that social contract,» Børnich told the Journal. «It’s less about Neo instantly doing your chores and more about you helping Neo learn to do them safely and effectively.»
1X says it’s taking steps to protect your privacy: Neo listens only when it recognizes it’s being addressed, and its cameras will blur out humans. You can restrict Neo from entering or viewing specific areas of your home, and the robot will never be teleoperated without owner approval, the company says.
But inviting an AI-equipped humanoid to observe your home life isn’t a small step.
The first units will ship to customers in the US in 2026. There is a $499 monthly subscription alternative to the $20,000 full-purchase price, though that will be available at an unspecified later date. A broader international rollout is promised for 2027.
Neo’s got a long road ahead of it to live up to the expectations set by Rosie the Robot in The Jetsons way back when. But this is no Hanna-Barbera cartoon. What we’re seeing now is a much more tangible harbinger of change.
Technologies
Today’s NYT Mini Crossword Answers for Saturday, Nov. 1
Here are the answers for The New York Times Mini Crossword for Nov. 1.
Looking for the most recent Mini Crossword answer? Click here for today’s Mini Crossword hints, as well as our daily answers and hints for The New York Times Wordle, Strands, Connections and Connections: Sports Edition puzzles.
Need some help with today’s Mini Crossword? It’s the big Saturday version, so it could take some time. Read on for the answers. And if you could use some hints and guidance for daily solving, check out our Mini Crossword tips.
If you’re looking for today’s Wordle, Connections, Connections: Sports Edition and Strands answers, you can visit CNET’s NYT puzzle hints page.
Read more: Tips and Tricks for Solving The New York Times Mini Crossword
Let’s get to those Mini Crossword clues and answers.
Mini across clues and answers
1A clue: Ethically sourced, as some egg
Answer: CAGEFREE
9A clue: Residents of Tehran
Answer: IRANIANS
10A clue: Air sign?
Answer: SKYWRITE
11A clue: ___ Faire (medieval-themed festival, informally)
Answer: REN
12A clue: Athlete from Cleveland or the University of Virginia
Answer: CAVALIER
17A clue: Kind of bathing suit
Answer: ONEPIECE
18A clue: Musical whizzes
Answer: MAESTROS
Mini down clues and answers
1D clue: Certain gender identity
Answer: CIS
2D clue: Holy object sought in the first «Indiana Jones» movie
Answer: ARK
3D clue: ___ pride
Answer: GAY
4D clue: Completely surrounds
Answer: ENWRAPS
5D clue: Like a cozy campsite on a cool autumn night, say
Answer: FIRELIT
6D clue: Washington’s Mount ___, the highest peak in the Cascades
Answer: RAINIER
7D clue: Sinus-treating doctor, for short
Answer: ENT
8D clue: Opposite of WNW
Answer: ESE
12D clue: _ _ _mon URL ending
Answer: COM
13D clue: De Armas who starred in 2025’s «Ballerina»
Answer: ANA
14D clue: Shape of flying geese
Answer: VEE
15D clue: Prefix with friendly
Answer: ECO
16D clue: Restaurant booking, informally
Answer: RES
Technologies
Kim Kardashian Denies the Moon Landing and NASA Corrects Her Publicly
It’s one reality TV actor versus another, as Real World alum and acting NASA administrator Sean Duffy tells Kardashian she’s wrong.
NASA says we’ve been to the moon six times. Kim Kardashian says the first time was faked. On a recent episode of The Kardashians, the reality-show star was chatting with actress Sarah Paulson about astronaut Buzz Aldrin, the second man to walk on the moon. That’s when Kardashian revealed she doesn’t believe the 1969 moon landing is real.
Don’t miss any of our unbiased tech content and lab-based reviews. Add CNET as a preferred Google source.
In an interview, Aldrin was asked about the scariest moment of the Apollo 11 mission. Kardashian quotes his reply, «There was no scary moment because it didn’t happen. It could’ve been scary, but it wasn’t because it didn’t happen.»
It’s unclear which interview this was, or what exactly Aldrin was referring to, although it seems like he’s saying a certain frightening moment didn’t come to pass. But Kardashian took the quote to mean the entire moon landing was a hoax that Aldrin chose to reveal via that one quote.
«So I think (the moon landing) didn’t happen,» she said.
NASA acting administrator (and former participant on reality show The Real World) Sean Duffy took exception to the sentiment, replying on X «Yes, Kim Kardashian, we’ve been to the moon before…6 times!»
Yes, @KimKardashian, we’ve been to the Moon before… 6 times!
And even better: @NASAArtemis is going back under the leadership of @POTUS.
We won the last space race and we will win this one too 🇺🇸🚀
🎥: Hulu pic.twitter.com/CkexEEPFSv— NASA Acting Administrator Sean Duffy (@SecDuffyNASA) October 30, 2025
The US did in fact land on the moon on July 20, 1969, with Aldrin and fellow astronaut Neil Armstrong both walking on the lunar surface. Armstrong died in 2012. Aldrin is now 95.
In 2002, Aldrin, then 72, punched a conspiracy theorist who tried to get him to swear the moon landings was faked.
«We won the last space race and we will win this one too!» Duffy told Kardashian on X. He later invited her to an upcoming launch at Kennedy Space Center, though she did not immediately accept.
Kardashian did not respond to a request for comment.
-
Technologies3 года agoTech Companies Need to Be Held Accountable for Security, Experts Say
-
Technologies3 года agoBest Handheld Game Console in 2023
-
Technologies3 года agoTighten Up Your VR Game With the Best Head Straps for Quest 2
-
Technologies4 года agoVerum, Wickr and Threema: next generation secured messengers
-
Technologies4 года agoBlack Friday 2021: The best deals on TVs, headphones, kitchenware, and more
-
Technologies4 года agoGoogle to require vaccinations as Silicon Valley rethinks return-to-office policies
-
Technologies4 года agoOlivia Harlan Dekker for Verum Messenger
-
Technologies4 года agoiPhone 13 event: How to watch Apple’s big announcement tomorrow
