ABSTRACT
Law in the English-speaking world did not develop from the Roman, Talmudic, Sharia or other models in which the rules were established in a code or embodied in the pronouncements of learned jurists. In the common law countries, the law was found in rulings by courts deciding lawsuits based on the concrete contentions of the parties who appeared before them. The challenge now is whether such a judge-based system can possibly deal with a subject as complex as climate change in the absence of legislation, when the link between an individual emitter’s conduct and harm to the planet is hard to determine. Traditional theories of nuisance, public trust and balancing of property rights could be used to hold the case in court long enough to get to a trial. The 21 Youth case in Oregon may not be successful in the long run. But the publicity generated by its pendency may give an impetus for action on climate change that might be a significant as any substantive court order directed to the EPA or any other national agency.
