State Court Solutions: Finding Standing for Private Climate Change Plaintiffs in the Wake of Washington Environmental Council v. Bellon

For a shining second, the landmark Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency seemed to signal a new era for climate change litigation in the federal courts. Unfortunately, the prospects of such litigation in the years since the decision have become far bleaker. The recent Ninth Circuit decision in Washington Environmental Council v. Bellon is merely the latest in a string of federal court decisions that have reduced the Massachusetts v. EPA precedent to near irrelevancy. It is now clearly established that Article III standing, a necessary prerequisite to any claim in federal court, will not be granted to private plaintiffs seeking relief for climate change related harms by filing claims against greenhouse gas emitters or regulatory agencies that refuse to take action. As a result, private climate change plaintiffs must rely on alternative avenues to have their claims heard in court. This Note highlights the importance of private plaintiffs in the history of environmental law and argues that the Washington Environmental Council v. Bellon decision was overbroad. In the wake of the Ninth Circuit's decision, this Note suggests that private climate change plaintiffs who find themselves shut out of federal courts should consider seeking relief through the state court system.