Description: Constitutional climate change lawsuit seeking an order requiring the federal government to research and establish a program for direct atmospheric carbon removal.
Komor v. United States
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 08/27/2019 Order Download Motion to stay granted. Arizona Federal Court Stayed Pro Se Climate Suit Pending Resolution of Juliana. The federal district court for the District of Arizona granted federal defendants’ motion to stay a pro se plaintiff’s lawsuit asserting climate change-related claims. In its two-page order granting the motion, the court stayed the pro se action until Juliana is resolved in the federal district court in Oregon and established deadlines by which the plaintiff would have to act after resolution of Juliana in order to lift the stay. 08/07/2019 Motion Download Motion filed by defendants for stay pending the Ninth Circuit's decision in Juliana v. United States. The defendants sought to stay the case pending the Ninth Circuit’s resolution of the appeal in Juliana v. United States, arguing in their motion that a stay was appropriate given that the issues were “virtually identical” to those in Juliana. 07/30/2019 Motion Download Motion and memorandum in support of motion to intervene filed by proposed intervenor-defendants. Three of the Juliana plaintiffs moved to intervene in the pro se action, contending that the plaintiff had “substantially plagiarized” their complaint and that his lawsuit could adversely affect their case. 06/28/2019 Letter Download Plaintiff filed correspondence with Juliana plaintiffs' counsel. 05/29/2019 Complaint Download Complaint filed. Pro Se Plaintiff Filed Constitutional Climate Case in Arizona Federal Court Asking for National Plan to Remove Carbon from Atmosphere. A pro se plaintiff filed a lawsuit in federal court in Arizona against the United States, the President, and federal agencies and officials asserting that he and other class action plaintiffs were suffering from “immediate and threatened injuries” due to the defendants’ actions and inaction supporting the production and consumption of fossil fuels. The complaint asserted violations of due process, equal protection, and the public trust doctrine. The complaint also alleged that the defendants infringed on unenumerated rights protected by the Ninth Amendment, which the complaint said included “the right to be sustained by our country’s vital natural systems, including our climate system.” The plaintiff asked the court to order the defendants to prepare a consumption-based inventory of carbon dioxide emissions; to implement a “national remedial plan” to phase out fossil fuel emissions (“like that described in the congressional resolution “Green New Deal”); and to fund, research, and operationalize a methodology for “active atmospheric carbon removal.” The complaint alleged that direct atmospheric carbon removal was the “only effective relief” the plaintiff could request because “replacing or augmenting environmental protections, as requested by Juliana v. USA” would not be sufficient “to avoid the fast approaching mid-2030’s climate deadline with its grave and irreparably catastrophic effects on human life.”