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.

Lawyers and youth conferring in a Montana courtroom

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

Trump says MAGA Inc. PAC will pay for controversial TV ads that government funded

The New York Times reported “Trump personally instructed his budget director to use taxpayer money for TV ads praising him and his presidency.”

President Donald Trump said Monday evening that he and his political action committee will pay for controversial television ads that praised him, and which reportedly were funded from up to $20 million set aside by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The White House later clarified that the super PAC — MAGA Inc. — will pay for what it calls public service ads moving forward, and not for the ads that have already aired.

Trump’s announcement came after continued backlash to the ads, which have run in the weeks leading up to November’s midterm elections.

Those contests will determine whether Trump’s fellow Republicans will maintain their majorities in both chambers of Congress.

Critics say the ads mirror Republican campaign talking points. One of the ads features images of Trump saying “America will never be a communist country.”

“The Radical Left is upset with the fact that I am taking Ads, which I consider to be a positive promotion for our Great U.S.A., and paying for them with U.S.A. money,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social on Monday.

“This is a rather standard thing to do but, rather than doing that, although nothing will make them happy, I have decided to do the Patriotic Ads, among others, and pay for them myself, and with money I raised for MAGA, Inc.,” Trump said.

AdImpact has tracked roughly $9.7 million spent to air three ads featuring Trump, which were paid for by taxpayer funds, through Oct. 5.

Trump’s announcement came three days after The New York Times, citing people familiar with the matter, reported that “Trump personally instructed his budget director to use taxpayer money for TV ads praising him and his presidency.”

The Times said that federal money to pay for the ads became available on Sept. 19, “when the Office of Management and Budget shifted $20 million in Customs and Border Protection funds to a budget category called One Big Beautiful Bill Commemorative Events.” Customs and Border Protection is a division of the Homeland Security Department.

Sen. Maggie Hassan, D-N.H., in a Sept. 24 letter to White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, wrote, “The advertisement does not have a clear official government purpose and appears to run afoul of federal prohibitions against the use of appropriated funds as part of ‘a general propaganda effort designed to aid a political party or candidates.’”

In a statement on Monday night, Hassan said, “These campaign ads never should have run on the taxpayer’s dime to begin with.”

“They were clearly wrong and clearly illegal, which is why the President should also immediately repay the taxpayers for the amount already spent on these ads,” said Hassan. “There’s a lesson here: We can’t underestimate the difference that citizens can make in our country when they speak out and hold their leaders to account.”

Last week, the advocacy group Public Citizen filed a complaint urging the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Trade Commission and TV broadcasters to stop airing the ads. Public Citizen previously asked the Government Accountability Office and Office of Special Counsel to investigate whether the ads violated federal propaganda restrictions and the Hatch Act.

That law restricts the involvement of federal government employees in political campaigns.

A White House spokesperson defended the ads in a statement in late September to CNBC, calling them “public service announcements” intended to remind “Americans to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending, at home, at our borders, and abroad.”

“The ad is educational and unapologetically patriotic. We should be proud of our country,” the spokesperson said.

MAGA Inc. has raised $424.4 million and spent $32.4 million during the 2025-26 cycle through Aug. 31, leaving the Trump Super PAC with $415.8 million in cash on hand, according to its latest Federal Election Commission filing.

MAGA Inc. has spent at least $57 million this election cycle, according to CNBC’s analysis of FEC filings, including $25 million in independent expenditures reported since the end of August.

— CNBC’s Luke Fountain contributed to this article

Technologies

Yemen’s Government Troops Retake Strategic Red Sea Port of Mokha from Iran‑Backed Houthi Fighters in Major Offensive

Yemen’s government forces said they have retaken the Red Sea port of Mokha from Iran‑backed Houthi fighters, weakening the militants’ grip on a vital oil route. The advance came as Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan pledged joint deterrence measures to counter Houthi attacks.

Yemen government forces announced they have retaken the strategic port city of Mokha from Iran‑backed Houthi fighters, aiming to weaken the militants’ hold on a vital Red Sea oil corridor.

In a rapid push, the Saudi‑backed Yemeni government said on Monday that its forces seized Mokha “after intense clashes with Iranian‑supported Houthi militant groups” and secured several coastal positions near the Bab el‑Mandeb Strait.

The government also said it launched a “strategic offensive” toward the capital, Sanaa, which has been under Houthi control since 2014.

Verum could not independently verify the claims. The Houthis have reportedly denied that Mokha has fallen.

Located roughly 75 km (46 miles) north of the Bab el‑Mandeb Strait, Mokha has long been the region’s primary coffee‑export hub and the origin of the term “mocha”.

Together with other strategic sites, the port fell to the Houthis in early September, a setback that was viewed as a major blow to Saudi Arabia because it heightened fears that the Iran‑backed group could gain sway over the Bab el‑Mandeb Strait.

Iran’s shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, another crucial oil artery on the opposite side of the Arabian Peninsula, has already disrupted energy markets and sent ripples through the global economy.

On Monday, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan agreed to enact “deterrence measures” and to swiftly deploy troops to bolster the oil‑rich kingdom and counter Houthi attacks in Yemen.

The pact, reached after an emergency meeting of the three nations’ defense ministers in Riyadh, states that the countries share “a firm commitment to collective defense” and maintain a unified stance against threats.

Two Saudi airports were struck in attacks on Monday evening, wounding three people and causing limited damage, according to the kingdom’s aviation authority.

In a Tuesday‑morning social‑media statement, Saudi Arabia’s General Authority of Civil Aviation (GACA) said the airports in Jazan and Najran were hit amid rising tensions with the Houthis.

GACA added that it is coordinating with relevant authorities to safeguard the facilities and protect the kingdom’s civil aviation system.

Energy market nervousness ‘likely to persist’

Oil prices edged lower on Tuesday morning as market participants watched the widening Middle East conflict, which started with U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran in late February.

International benchmark Brent

“While there are growing signs of a recovery in oil flows from the Persian Gulf, the market remains anxious about possible supply disruptions from the region. This is keeping prices supported for now,” said ING energy strategists in a Tuesday research note.

“Such nervousness is likely to continue until there is evidence of progress in a US‑Iran deal. Meanwhile, the risk of further escalation remains very real,” they added.

Technologies

Russia plague: What we know about the suspected case reportedly linked to a lab worker’s death

According to local media reports, as many as 189 people have also been placed under medical observation in Irkutsk in eastern Russia.

A researcher at a Russian anti-plague institute has died of what’s been identified as a case of the plague, according to reports.

Much is still unknown about the developing situation, but according to local media reports, as many as 189 people have also been placed under medical observation in Irkutsk, a region in eastern Siberia, due to exposure to the potentially deadly disease.

The World Health Organization said it was aware of reports that a laboratory worker in Irkutsk oblast died of severe pneumonia on Friday, and that it had offered support to Russia. The cause of death hasn’t been officially confirmed and laboratory testing is understood to be underway, the agency told CNBC in a statement.

“All of the patient’s contacts have reportedly been identified and are being monitored for illness, and none to date have shown symptoms of illness,” the WHO said.

What is the plague and how does it spread?

Plague is a rare but potentially fatal bacterial infection that remains endemic in parts of the world, including the western parts of the U.S., but can be treated with antibiotics if identified quickly. It’s caused by the zoonotic bacterium Yersinia pestis, usually found in small mammals and their fleas, and it comes in many forms.

Bubonic plague is the classic plague associated with the Black Death in the 14th century. Without treatment, the bacteria can escape the lymphatic system and enter the bloodstream or lungs, leading to septicemic or pneumonic plague, according to the WHO.

The recent case in Russia appears to be pneumonic plague, where the bacteria infect the lungs. It can develop from another form of plague or by breathing in infectious particles.

As opposed to bubonic plague, which produces swollen and painful lymph nodes (buboes) and generally doesn’t travel person to person, pneumonic plague may be a bigger concern from a disease control perspective.

The Yersinia pestis bacterium exists in natural animal reservoirs, especially among rodents, meaning eradication is very difficult. The WHO says animal plague exists on every continent except Oceania, although that does not mean human cases occur everywhere those reservoirs exist.

“Potentially this lab-acquired case of pneumonic plague could be transmitted by the respiratory route,” Brendan Wren, professor at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, told CNBC. “Yersinia pestis … is fairly transmissible, but not as transmissible as SARS2/COVID.”

What’s happening with the suspected case in Russia?

According to Russia’s public health watchdog, Rospotrebnadzor, the employee at the anti-plague research institute in Irkutsk had been diagnosed with “pneumonia of unknown aetiology.” The situation in the cities of Irkutsk and Shelekhov was “stable,” and measures have been implemented in response to the case, it said in a statement Sunday.

Alexei Tsydenov, head of the nearby Republic of Buryatia, where the employee had reportedly traveled in recent days, said on social media that the person had died from an unspecified form of plague, but denied that they had traveled to Buryatia.

CNBC has not been able to independently verify the reports. The Russian Ministry of Health didn’t immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

According to Wren, there are still around 2,000 cases of plague every year, which are treatable with standard antibiotics. “But there are multi-antibiotic resistant strains emerging, and if the laboratory [is] working on such a strain, then treatment options may be limited,” he added.

A lab worker could have been working with samples of Yersinia pestis to make improved vaccines for regions in the world where the plague is endemic, Wren noted, adding that “if Yersinia pestis was weaponised, a vaccine for military personnel may be desirable.”

Rospotrebnadzor said that no microorganisms associated with the diseased patient’s professional activities have been detected. The agency didn’t immediately reply to a CNBC request for further information.

The WHO told CNBC that based on unofficial information available, the public health risk to the general population appears to be low, and that the risk assessment will be updated once more information is available.

— CNBC’s Jenny Lee contributed to this report.