Climate Litigation: The Red Herring of Tools for Mitigating the Effects of Climate Change

Abstract

Despite their good and morally admirable intentions, advocates of climate litigation are too ready to trumpet its benefits without frankly assessing its limitations as a mitigation tool. The purpose of this paper is to prove one core thesis: climate litigation suffers from particular limitations or weaknesses that render it incapable of making any meaningful contribution to the mitigation of emissions in a timely, effective and comprehensive manner.

Keywords: climate litigation; climate change; role of the judiciary and courts; Rocky Hill case; Urgenda case; Massachusetts case