Civil claim · Older published case
Held v. Montana
Montana Supreme Court, DA 23-0575, 2024 MT 312 · Lewis and Clark
Opinion December 18, 2024
What was published
Youth plaintiffs, with Rikki Held named in the caption, sued the State over laws that kept agencies from considering greenhouse-gas emissions. After a 2023 trial before Lewis and Clark District Judge Kathy Seeley, the Montana Supreme Court affirmed on December 18, 2024. Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote for a 6–1 court that the state constitution’s right to a clean and healthful environment includes a stable climate system, and that the MEPA limitation was unconstitutional. The court said later, project-specific questions about a greenhouse-gas analysis belong in individual permitting cases. One of the youth plaintiffs in the caption is Eva L., through her guardian Mark Lighthiser. She is also the named plaintiff in the later federal case Lighthiser v. Trump.
Where it stands
A state constitutional decision. It is the human-rights file in the climate sense: a fundamental right, a trial, and an appellate opinion. It is not a PACER case and it has no federal case number.
Does not establish
Do not list the minor plaintiffs out again. The opinion is not a permit for or against any one mine, plant, or well. Lighthiser v. Trump is the federal sequel, and it was dismissed.
Sources
- Synopsis, DA 23-0575Justia
2024 MT 312, decided December 18, 2024.
- Supreme Court affirms HeldDaily Montanan, via Spokesman-Review
Micah Drew and Blair Miller, December 18, 2024. 6–1. McGrath. Seeley’s August 2023 trial ruling.









