A new lawsuit has been filed by a group of young Americans, ranging in age from 7 to 25, challenging the federal government’s rollback of climate protections under the Trump administration. The plaintiffs, represented by a coalition of legal and environmental advocacy groups, claim that their constitutional rights are being violated by policies that contribute to climate change and its increasingly severe consequences.

The legal action was launched in response to a series of executive orders and policy shifts that, according to the lawsuit, have dismantled environmental safeguards, weakened climate research, and undermined progress toward clean energy and decarbonization. The complaint outlines how the ongoing climate crisis — worsened by the government’s reliance on fossil fuels — has already disrupted the lives of young people across the country, from Montana to Florida.

Many of the young plaintiffs have faced direct harm from climate-related disasters. Wildfires, hurricanes, floods, and extreme heat have displaced families, damaged homes, and caused serious health problems. One child in the lawsuit, just 7 years old, has been hospitalized multiple times due to respiratory infections worsened by wildfire smoke. Others have reported chronic symptoms, including headaches and shortness of breath, linked to increasing pollution and climate-related weather events.

Beyond physical health impacts, the plaintiffs argue that their educational and professional opportunities have also been affected. Some have been told by educators that climate-related coursework may be cut due to decreased funding. Others have worked to secure environmental grants — including one for electric school buses — that were ultimately revoked or unfulfilled as a result of federal policy shifts.

The mental health toll of climate change is also central to the case. Several plaintiffs describe suffering from intense climate anxiety, characterized as overwhelming and immobilizing. One plaintiff likened the emotional weight of climate anxiety to a crushing pressure that makes it difficult to breathe, emphasizing the deep psychological effects that environmental uncertainty has on the younger generation.

The lawsuit is being brought by an Oregon-based nonprofit known for its legal challenges targeting climate inaction. The organization previously led a high-profile case that sought to hold the federal government accountable for its contributions to climate change. Although the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear that earlier case, the legal effort inspired more than 60 similar lawsuits globally and set a foundation for further litigation.

In recent years, this legal strategy has seen significant victories. A court in Montana ruled that the state government has a constitutional duty to protect its citizens from climate change — a first in the U.S. In Hawaii, a legal settlement included a binding plan to decarbonize the state’s transportation system.

This latest case specifically names several departments and agencies — including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Transportation, the National Science Foundation, and the Department of Health and Human Services — as well as former President Trump and members of his administration.

In response to the lawsuit, a spokesperson for the current administration defended the rollback of climate policies, asserting that energy dominance and national security are higher priorities for voters than what the administration called a “radical climate agenda.” The spokesperson also stated that recent electoral outcomes reflect public support for restoring fossil fuel development.

However, the lawsuit cites growing scientific and economic warnings about climate risks. A recent report from global risk analysts predicts that unchecked climate change could halve global economic output by the end of the century. In the United States alone, 27 billion-dollar climate-related disasters occurred last year, underscoring the growing cost of inaction.

The plaintiffs emphasize that they are not motivated solely by political views, but by a profound sense of responsibility for the future. Their message is clear: the choices made today will define the world they inherit tomorrow.