Isabella Carter
The constitutions of more than three-quarters of the countries on Earth have explicit reference to environmental rights or responsibilities. However, the US Constitution has no explicit right to a clean environment, and efforts to persuade judges to find an implied right have not succeeded. While the US federal Constitution does not explicitly mention the environment, environmental lawmaking at the national level of government became important in the 1970s, and the strong federal presence of recent years makes apparent the significant constitutional authority of the central government in regard to the environment.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Environmental lawmaking at the national level of government | The federal government has significant constitutional authority in regard to the environment |
| Environmental rights | The constitutions of more than three-quarters of the countries on earth have explicit reference to environmental rights or responsibilities |
| Constitutional obligation | The federal Constitution does not explicitly state that the state and federal governments are constitutionally obliged to regulate on behalf of environmental quality |
| Implied right | The U.S. Constitution does not have an explicit right to a clean environment, but there have been efforts to persuade judges to find an implied right |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- The US Constitution does not explicitly protect the environment
- The federal Constitution does not oblige the state and federal governments to regulate environmental quality
- The US Constitution does not explicitly grant the right to a clean environment
- The US Constitution does not prevent states from barring hydraulic fracturing
- The US Constitution does not require the federal government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
The US Constitution does not explicitly protect the environment
Efforts to persuade judges to find an implied right to a clean environment have not succeeded. In the famous Juliana v. United States case, plaintiffs sought an order directing the federal government to slash the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions, but were unsuccessful.
While the US Constitution does not explicitly mention environmental rights, the constitutions of six states do have provisions with explicit environmental rights: Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island. Several other states’ constitutions have language about protecting the environment, but without clearly creating any rights. Most of these provisions were enacted in the early 1970s, a period of significant environmental lawmaking.
In contrast to the US, the constitutions of more than three-quarters of the countries on earth have explicit reference to environmental rights or responsibilities. In recent years, courts in the Netherlands, Germany, France, Australia, Pakistan, Nepal and Colombia have held that these provisions require national governments to act on climate change.
The Constitution's Ninth Section: Safeguarding Citizens' Rights and Freedoms
You may want to see also
The federal Constitution does not oblige the state and federal governments to regulate environmental quality
The US Constitution does not explicitly mention environmental rights or responsibilities. However, the constitutions of six states do have provisions with explicit environmental rights: Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island. Several other states' constitutions have language about protecting the environment, but without clearly creating any rights. Most of these provisions were enacted in the early 1970s, a period of significant environmental lawmaking.
The absence of a constitutional obligation for the state and federal governments to regulate environmental quality does not mean that they are unable to do so. Environmental lawmaking at the national level of government has become increasingly important since the 1970s, and the strong federal presence in recent years indicates the significant constitutional authority of the central government in regard to the environment.
While the federal Constitution does not explicitly oblige the state and federal governments to regulate environmental quality, there are arguments that a diligent and imaginative reading of the text would find the right between the lines. For example, it could be argued that the right to a clean environment is a fundamental personal right protected by the ninth amendment or guaranteed by the due process clause. However, these arguments have not been successful in persuading the Supreme Court or most federal district courts.
Florida's Constitution: Animal Protection Laws and Their Importance
You may want to see also
The US Constitution does not explicitly grant the right to a clean environment
However, this does not mean that the US government lacks the constitutional authority to protect the environment. Environmental lawmaking at the national level became important in the 1970s, but its history reaches back into the nineteenth century. The strong federal presence in recent years demonstrates the significant constitutional authority of the central government in regard to the environment. As Philip Soper has argued, "no conceivable measure reasonably intended to protect the environment is beyond the reach" of federal authority.
While the US Constitution does not explicitly mention environmental rights, the constitutions of six states do include provisions with explicit environmental rights: Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island. Several other states' constitutions include language about protecting the environment, although this falls short of creating any clear rights. In 2013, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court used the state constitution's Environmental Rights Amendment to invalidate a state statute that had prevented municipalities from barring hydraulic fracturing.
In contrast to the US, the constitutions of more than three-quarters of the countries on earth explicitly refer to environmental rights or responsibilities. In recent years, courts in the Netherlands, Germany, France, Australia, Pakistan, Nepal, and Colombia have held that these provisions require national governments to act on climate change.
Wealth-Based Discrimination: Are Constitutional Protections Effective?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
![SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION: Fashions in Law, Politics, Environment, Winter/Spring 1998: [Second Edition]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/71W2vyCA9bL._AC_UY218_.jpg)
The US Constitution does not prevent states from barring hydraulic fracturing
The constitutions of more than three-quarters of the countries on earth have explicit reference to environmental rights or responsibilities. In the last several years, courts in the Netherlands, Germany, France, Australia, Pakistan, Nepal and Colombia have held that these provisions require national governments to act on climate change.
In the US, the constitutions of six states – Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island – have provisions with explicit environmental rights. Several other states’ constitutions have language about protecting the environment, but without clearly creating any rights. Most of these provisions were enacted in the early 1970s, but they received relatively little attention until a 2013 decision by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Robinson Township v. Commonwealth, which used the state constitution’s Environmental Rights Amendment to invalidate a state statute that had prevented municipalities from barring hydraulic fracturing.
Environmental lawmaking at the national level of government became important only in the 1970s, but the beginnings reach back well into the nineteenth century, if not farther. This history, especially the strong federal presence of recent years, makes apparent the significant constitutional authority of the central government in regard to the environment.
Firearms and the Constitution: What Protections Exist?
You may want to see also
The US Constitution does not require the federal government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
The constitutions of more than three-quarters of the countries on Earth explicitly mention environmental rights or responsibilities. In recent years, courts in the Netherlands, Germany, France, Australia, Pakistan, Nepal, and Colombia have interpreted these provisions to require their national governments to act on climate change. However, the US Constitution does not fall into this category.
While environmental lawmaking at the national level of government in the US became important in the 1970s, its history reaches back to the nineteenth century or possibly even earlier. This history, along with the strong federal presence of recent years, highlights the constitutional authority of the central government regarding the environment. Despite this, there is no constitutional obligation for the state and federal governments to regulate environmental quality.
Although the US Constitution does not explicitly mention environmental rights, some argue that a diligent and imaginative reading between the lines of the text could uncover such rights. For example, it has been suggested that environmental rights could be found in the "penumbra" of the Bill of Rights, as a fundamental personal right protected by the Ninth Amendment, or as a right "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty" and guaranteed by the due process clause. However, the Supreme Court and all but a few federal district courts have not been convinced by these arguments.
While the US Constitution does not require the federal government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the constitutions of six states do have provisions with explicit environmental rights: Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island. Several other states' constitutions have language about protecting the environment, but without clearly creating any rights.
The Constitution's Role in Ensuring Safe Sex-Segregated Bathrooms
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
No, the US Constitution does not explicitly protect the environment. However, there are arguments that a right to a clean environment can be found between the lines of the text, chiefly in the "penumbra" of the Bill of Rights, or as a fundamental personal right protected by the ninth amendment.
Yes, the constitutions of more than three-quarters of the countries on earth have explicit reference to environmental rights or responsibilities. In the last several years, courts in the Netherlands, Germany, France, Australia, Pakistan, Nepal and Colombia have held that these provisions require national governments to action on climate change.
Yes, the constitutions of six states have provisions with explicit environmental rights – Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island. Several other states’ constitutions have language about protecting the environment, but without clearly creating any rights.
