Penn Undergraduate Law Journal
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs

The Roundtable


Welcome to the Roundtable, a forum for incisive commentary and analysis
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.


Legal Loraxes: Who Will Stand for the Trees?

1/16/2024

0 Comments

 
Picture
Source: The Lorax (1972)
“I am the Lorax, I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues.”
By Michael Merolla

Michael Merolla is a first-year student at the University of Pennsylvania’s College of Arts and Sciences studying Political Science.

Locus standi, commonly known as legal standing, is the right of a person or group to be heard in court.
[1] The concept of “standing” is relatively simple in theory. In order to bring a lawsuit in a court, a party must meet four conditions: interest, injury, causation, and redressability. First, a plaintiff must have a legally recognizable interest in the case. Second, the plaintiff must have suffered an injury or infringement upon their person or rights. Third, the alleged injury must have been caused by the named defendant. Last, a favorable court decision must be able to redress, or alleviate, the injury. However, the concept of legal standing becomes convoluted in the context of environmental law. In America, the environment lacks the right to stand as its own entity. As the global climate crisis worsens, the legal world may be the last resort to deliver the decisive action needed and neglected by political and economic forces for much too long. [2] The question must be asked: Who will speak for the trees in the court of law?
It is not a radical or unprecedented idea to provide legal standing for non-human and/or non-speaking entities. In his groundbreaking paper, “Should Trees Have Standing,” environmentalist Christopher Stone argues, “It is no answer to say that streams and forests cannot have standing because streams and forests cannot speak. Corporations cannot speak either; nor can states, estates, infants, incompetents, municipalities or universities. Lawyers speak for them, as they customarily do for the ordinary citizen with legal problems.” [3] Supporting this proposition, corporations have been entitled to many of the legal rights of natural persons for over a century in America. In 1886, the Supreme Court established the tenet of “corporate personhood” in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Rail Road. [4] Protected by the Court ever since, corporate personhood has allowed industry titans like The Walt Disney Company and Microsoft Corporation to protect their intellectual property through litigation. Evidently, the ability to speak in one’s own defense is not a prerequisite to be spoken for in the courts. Non-human personhood is a settled concept of American law.
 
Although emerging into the spotlight relatively recently, environmental law is hardly a new development for the legal system. Oxford professor Elizabeth Fisher notes, “Environmental problems have been inherent in civilization since the beginning and have needed collective management.” [5] Fisher provides historical examples to back this assertion. Ancient Imperial China restricted the bird-hunting and the burning of forests in the first-century. Ancient Rome regulated rubbish and noxious processes, such as the tanning of animal hides. The Magna Carta-adjacent Forest Charter oversaw the King’s Forests through specialized forest courts.

This is clear historical precedent for both non-human personhood and legal stewardship of the environment. Still, the recognition of environmental personhood in American courts falls far behind. Simply put, nature has no voice right now. Monti Aguirre, a member of the environmental organization International Rivers, says, “Traditionally, nature has been subject to a Western-conceived legal regime of property-based ownership…an owner has the right to modify their features, their natural features, or to destroy them all at will.” [6] Aguirre is addressing the redressability concerns of environmental litigation. Unlike corporate law, in which court decisions revolve around economic damage inflicted upon or by a company, it is much more difficult to put environmental justice in terms of dollar signs or prison sentences.

In socioeconomic theory, the climate change crisis would be described as a common pool problem. Our world has a finite “resource” pool, providing individuals with an incentive to exploit limited benefits that would otherwise go to their competitors. [7] If users attempt to conserve resources, they will not benefit from their reservation, as their competitors can still exploit the larger pool. This phenomena can be extrapolated to environmental personhood. Let’s say America entitles the environment to legal rights, particularly against environmentally-destructive corporate practices. Lawyers would still have little incentive to actually take up a case for the environment, to wager their time and reputation against powerful corporate firms. Erin O'Donnell, a University of Melbourne Law School academic fellow, explained to NPR, "It becomes everybody's responsibility and then, possibly, nobody's responsibility...who actually has the funding, usually, to run a lawsuit. Lawsuits are very expensive.” [8] Presently, there is little economic promise for governments and lawyers to support the environment, as their competitors can retain exploitative practices for greater profits.

Climate justice transcends these economic concerns; this is about morals. Climate change is no longer simply theoretical. It is imminent. The world is overheating, the sea levels are rising, and extreme weather occurrences are raging with more fervor than ever before. Fossil fuel industries abuse the Earth’s natural resources and release greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere without penalty or repercussion. Scientists have warned that to avoid the worst effects of global warming, world-wide carbon emission must be reduced 45% by 2030 and reach a net zero equilibrium of carbon production and absorption by 2050. [9] No one, governments especially, is acting fast enough to reverse, or at least mitigate, the pace of global warming. As it seemingly too often does, the burden here falls upon the scales of justice. The legal community must put pressure on the political infrastructure to impart nature with legal standing, activating the law in defense of the biosphere. We must all selflessly stand-up for and work to protect the environment from corporate, government, and individual abuses. To preserve humanity’s tomorrow, lawyers must begin to speak for the trees today.
“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better.
It’s not.”
[1] Walsh, Jennifer. “Standing: What It is and Why It Matters.” Brown & Crouppen Law Firm (2023) https://www.brownandcrouppen.com/blog/what-is-standing/.
[2] Laszewska-Hellriegel, Martyna. (2022). Environmental Personhood as a Tool to Protect the Nature. Philosophia. 51. 1-16. 10.1007/s11406-022-00583-z. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364312784_Environmental_Personhood_as_a_Tool_to_Protect_the_Nature.
[3] Stone, Christopher D. “Should Trees Have Standing?—Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects.” Southern California Law Review (1972). https://iseethics.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/stone-christopher-d-should-trees-have-standing.pdf.
[4] Torres-Spelliscy, Ciara. “The History of Corporate Personhood.” Brennan Center for Justice, www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/history-corporate-personhood.
[5] Fisher, Elizabeth.'The history of environmental law', Environmental Law: A Very Short Introduction, Very Short Introductions (Oxford, 2017; online edn, Oxford Academic, 26 Oct. 2017), https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198794189.003.0004.
[6] Westerman, Ashley. “Should Rivers Have Same Legal Rights as Humans? A Growing Number of Voices Say Yes.” NPR, NPR, 3 Aug. 2019, www.npr.org/2019/08/03/740604142/should-rivers-have-same-legal-rights-as-humans-a-growing-number-of-voices-say-yes.
[7] McLaughlin, Dennis, and Parag Pathak. “Common Pool Resources: Environmental Solutions Initiative.” Environmental Solutions Initiative | Focusing MIT’s Talents on the Interdisciplinary Environmental Challenges of Today, 17 Apr. 2018, https://environmentalsolutions.mit.edu/common-pool-resources/.
[8] Westerman, "Should Rivers Have the Same Legal Rights as Humans? A Growing Number of Voices Say Yes."
[9] “Net Zero Coalition.” United Nations, United Nations, www.un.org/en/climatechange/net-zero-coalition.

The opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions of the designated authors and do not reflect the opinions or views of the Penn Undergraduate Law Journal, our staff, or our clients.
0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.


    Categories

    All
    Aaron Tsui
    Akshita Tiwary
    Alana Bess
    Alana Mattei
    Albert Manfredi
    Alexander Saeedy
    Alexandra Aaron
    Alexandra Kanan
    Alexandra Kerrigan
    Alice Giannini
    Alicia Augustin
    Alicia Kysar
    Ally Kalishman
    Ally Margolis
    Alya Abbassian
    Amanda Damayanti
    Anika Prakash
    Anna Schwartz
    Arshiya Pant
    Ashley Kim
    Astha Pandey
    Audrey Pan
    Benjamin Ng'aru
    Brónach Rafferty
    Bryce Klehm
    Cary Holley
    Catherine Tang
    Christina Gunzenhauser
    Christine Mitchell
    Christopher Brown
    Clarissa Alvarez
    Cole Borlee
    Connor Gallagher
    Dan Spinelli
    Dan Zhang
    David Katz
    Davis Berlind
    Derek Willie
    Dhilan Lavu
    Edgar Palomino
    Edna Simbi
    Ella Jewell
    Ella Sohn
    Emma Davies
    Esther Lee
    Evelyn Bond
    Filzah Belal
    Frank Geng
    Gabrielle Cohen
    Gabriel Maliha
    Georgia Ray
    Graham Reynolds
    Habib Olapade
    Hailie Goldsmith
    Haley Son
    Hannah Steinberg
    Harshit Rai
    Hennessis Umacta
    Henry Lininger
    Hetal Doshi
    Ingrid Holmquist
    Iris Zhang
    Irtaza Ali
    Isabela Baghdady
    Ishita Chakrabarty
    Jack Burgess
    Jessica "Lulu" Lipman
    Joe Anderson
    Jonathan Lahdo
    Jonathan Stahl
    Joseph Squillaro
    Justin Yang
    Kaitlyn Rentala
    Kanishka Bhukya
    Katie Kaufman
    Kelly Liang
    Keshav Sharma
    Ketaki Gujar
    Khlood Awan
    Lauren Pak
    Lavi Ben Dor
    Libby Rozbruch
    Lindsey Li
    Luis Bravo
    Lyan Casamalhuapa
    Lyndsey Reeve
    Madeline Decker
    Maja Cvjetanovic
    Maliha Farrooz
    Marco DiLeonardo
    Margaret Lu
    Matthew Caulfield
    Michael Keshmiri
    Michael Merolla
    Mina Nur Basmaci
    Muskan Mumtaz
    Natalie Peelish
    Natasha Darlington
    Natasha Kang
    Nathan Liu
    Nayeon Kim
    Nicholas Parsons
    Nicholas Williams
    Nicole Greenstein
    Nicole Patel
    Nihal Sahu
    Omar Khoury
    Owen Voutsinas Klose
    Owen Voutsinas-Klose
    Paula Vekker
    Pheby Liu
    Pragat Patel
    Rachel Bina
    Rachel Gu
    Rachel Pomerantz
    Rebecca Heilweil
    Regina Salmons
    Sajan Srivastava
    Samantha Graines
    Sandeep Suresh
    Sanjay Dureseti
    Sarah Simon
    Saranya Das Sharma
    Saranya Sharma
    Sasha Bryski
    Saxon Bryant
    Sean Foley
    Sebastian Bates
    Serena Camici
    Shahana Banerjee
    Shannon Alvino
    Shiven Sharma
    Siddarth Sethi
    Sneha Parthasarathy
    Sneha Sharma
    Sophie Lovering
    Steven Jacobson
    Suaida Firoze
    Suprateek Neogi
    Takane Shoji
    Tanner Bowen
    Taryn MacKinney
    Thomas Cribbins
    Todd Costa
    Tyler Larkworthy
    Tyler Ringhofer
    Vatsal Patel
    Vikram Balasubramanian
    Vishwajeet Deshmukh
    Wajeeha Ahmad
    Yeonhwa Lee

    Archives

    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    September 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    May 2023
    March 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    September 2022
    June 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.