{"id":3356,"date":"2015-07-13T08:50:41","date_gmt":"2015-07-13T13:50:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?p=3356"},"modified":"2015-11-10T16:43:15","modified_gmt":"2015-11-10T21:43:15","slug":"wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/","title":{"rendered":"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

Daniela Lapidous<\/em>
\n Sabin Center Summer Intern<\/em><\/p>\n

\"Andrea<\/a>
Andrea Rodgers from the Western Environmental Law Center with three of the Petitioners.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

One year ago, eight young climate activists (ranging from 9 to 14 years old) petitioned Washington State\u2019s Department of Ecology (\u201cthe Department\u201d) to adopt and implement stricter greenhouse gas emissions regulations based on the most current and best available climate science. When the Department denied the petition<\/a> last August, the petitioners sued to appeal the denial. The activists\u2019 efforts are part of a campaign of similar legal cases coordinated by the non-profit Our Children\u2019s Trust<\/a>, through which the youths are calling for urgent action to protect Washington\u2019s natural resources for current and future generations of children.<\/p>\n

On Tuesday, June 23, a court decision ordered the Department to reconsider their denial of the petition. Effectively, Zoe & Stella Foster v. Washington Department of Ecology <\/i>has become the first case in the United States in which a court ordered a state agency to consider the best available climate science when setting greenhouse gas emissions restrictions. King County Superior Court Judge Hollis Hill issued the decision, and the young petitioners were represented by attorney Andrea Rodgers of the Western Environmental Law Center<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

In 2008, the Washington legislature adopted the goals of reducing overall state GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, to 25% below 1990 levels by 2035, and to 50% below 1990 levels by 2050 or 70% below the state\u2019s expected emissions that year (RCW 70.235.020<\/a>). The petitioners argued that the Department should adopt and implement regulations instead amounting to a minimum 80% reduction from 1990 GHG emissions by 2050, through a mandated, immediate 4% annual reduction in emissions.<\/p>\n

In justifying the Department\u2019s ability to act, the petitioners draw upon the State of Washington\u2019s constitutional obligations to protect natural resources, existing statutory obligations and executive orders, and the Public Trust Doctrine \u2013 which provides that certain natural resources cannot be owned privately and should instead be protected by the government for the use of all, including future generations. They also include an impressive overview of climate change science, from global hazards to local impacts on Washington. Two points are particularly interesting:<\/p>\n

First, the petitioners\u2019 recommended targets would be in line with Washington State\u2019s proportional contribution towards a global goal of returning atmospheric carbon dioxide levels to 350 ppm by 2100, which correlates with 1\u00b0C of warming. International agreements (such as the Copenhagen Accord in 2009) state that 2\u00b0C of warming is the \u2018safe\u2019 limit based on available science, but the petitioners argue that \u201cthe 2007 [IPCC] compilation of science from the early 2000\u2019s is now outdated and has been shown to underestimate the catastrophic impacts associated with warming of 2\u00b0C above preindustrial temperatures.\u201d The document points especially to the unpredictable effects of \u201cslow feedbacks,\u201d such as the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets, and cites Dr. James Hansen of NASA as confirming that 450 ppm would lead to greater than 2\u00b0C of warming.<\/p>\n

Second, the petitioners acknowledge that the Department cannot change the statutory limits for overall GHG emissions for 2020, 2035, and 2050, because only the legislature has the authority to do so. Instead, the petition argues that the statutory limits provide a \u201cceiling\u201d for maximum GHG emissions and contends that the Department has the right and obligation to enact stricter restrictions, through rulemaking, that would keep emissions below the defined ceiling.<\/p>\n

According to Rodgers, the decision to seek change through the regulatory process followed an unsuccessful attempt to compel the state legislature to act in a 2011 case<\/a> decided by the Washington Court of Appeals (Adora Svitak vs. State of Washington<\/i>). Rodgers explains, \u201cWe tried to hold the Legislature accountable for failing to take scientifically-based action to reduce GHG emissions, and the Washington Court of Appeals held that [the court] didn\u2019t have the power to do so, in part, because they considered climate change a political question. In that decision, the court made it clear that in order to make these arguments, we would need to challenge \u2018an affirmative state action or [characterize] the State\u2019s failure to undertake a duty to act as unconstitutional,\u2019 so we followed the Court\u2019s advice and petitioned [the Department of] Ecology to promulgate a rule that is within their statutory authority to do. That way, we would then have an \u2018affirmative state action,\u2019 i.e., Ecology\u2019s final decision on the rulemaking petition that could be appealed under the Administrative Procedures Act.\u201d<\/p>\n

Last December, the Department released a report suggesting that no change in greenhouse gas reduction standards would be made until after COP21, the international climate change conference happening this December in Paris. However, Judge Hill wrote in her decision that \u201cneither in its briefing nor in oral argument of this appeal did the Department seek to justify this suggested delay.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Department had moved to exclude the December report from the Superior Court\u2019s review, on the basis that it was published four months after the denial of the petition in August. The Department argued that the report was therefore not part of the administrative record and did not meet the requirements for new evidence. Judge Hill denied this motion, stating that the report constitutes relevant new evidence. She wrote that the Department should reconsider its denial of the petition in light of the scientific evidence and statements it makes in its own report: \u201cIf we delay action by even a few years, the rate of reduction needed to stabilize the global climate would be beyond anything achieved historically and would be more costly.\u201d<\/p>\n

The parties are currently engaged in settlement negotiations<\/a>. Department Director Maia Bellon will meet directly with the petitioners, and the petitioners have also invited Governor Inslee. The parties now have until August 7 to agree on a proposed rule regulating carbon dioxide emissions based on the best available science; if an agreement is not reached, the youths are prepared to go back to court and ask the court to order Ecology to promulgate a rule.<\/p>\n

In combination with the recent news<\/a> of a Dutch court ordering the Netherlands to implement stricter greenhouse gas emissions reductions, it has been a good few weeks for the enforcement of science-based targets.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Daniela Lapidous Sabin Center Summer Intern One year ago, eight young climate activists (ranging from 9 to 14 years old) petitioned Washington State\u2019s Department of Ecology (\u201cthe Department\u201d) to adopt and implement stricter greenhouse gas emissions regulations based on the most current and best available climate science. When the Department denied the petition last August, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1434,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5673,9417],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-3356","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-litigation","7":"category-state-law","8":"czr-hentry"},"yoast_head":"\nWA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals - Climate Law Blog<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals - Climate Law Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Daniela Lapidous Sabin Center Summer Intern One year ago, eight young climate activists (ranging from 9 to 14 years old) petitioned Washington State\u2019s Department of Ecology (\u201cthe Department\u201d) to adopt and implement stricter greenhouse gas emissions regulations based on the most current and best available climate science. When the Department denied the petition last August, […]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Climate Law Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2015-07-13T13:50:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-10T21:43:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1-300x225.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jennifer Klein\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@sabincenter\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@sabincenter\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jennifer Klein\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Jennifer Klein\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/feb003a23e39abcdba2d22ac5d5cf26f\"},\"headline\":\"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals\",\"datePublished\":\"2015-07-13T13:50:41+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-10T21:43:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/\"},\"wordCount\":1031,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1-300x225.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Climate Litigation\",\"State Law\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/\",\"name\":\"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals - Climate Law Blog\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1-300x225.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2015-07-13T13:50:41+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-10T21:43:15+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1.jpg\",\"width\":1024,\"height\":768,\"caption\":\"Andrea Rodgers from the Western Environmental Law Center with several Petitioners.\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/\",\"name\":\"Climate Law Blog\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png\",\"width\":2752,\"height\":260,\"caption\":\"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/x.com\/sabincenter\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/feb003a23e39abcdba2d22ac5d5cf26f\",\"name\":\"Jennifer Klein\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/author\/jklein4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals - Climate Law Blog","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals - Climate Law Blog","og_description":"Daniela Lapidous Sabin Center Summer Intern One year ago, eight young climate activists (ranging from 9 to 14 years old) petitioned Washington State\u2019s Department of Ecology (\u201cthe Department\u201d) to adopt and implement stricter greenhouse gas emissions regulations based on the most current and best available climate science. When the Department denied the petition last August, […]","og_url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/","og_site_name":"Climate Law Blog","article_published_time":"2015-07-13T13:50:41+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-10T21:43:15+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1-300x225.jpg","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"Jennifer Klein","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@sabincenter","twitter_site":"@sabincenter","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Jennifer Klein","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/"},"author":{"name":"Jennifer Klein","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/feb003a23e39abcdba2d22ac5d5cf26f"},"headline":"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals","datePublished":"2015-07-13T13:50:41+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-10T21:43:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/"},"wordCount":1031,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1-300x225.jpg","articleSection":["Climate Litigation","State Law"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/","name":"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals - Climate Law Blog","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1-300x225.jpg","datePublished":"2015-07-13T13:50:41+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-10T21:43:15+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2015\/07\/Washington-Youth-1.jpg","width":1024,"height":768,"caption":"Andrea Rodgers from the Western Environmental Law Center with several Petitioners."},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/2015\/07\/13\/wa-court-affirms-best-available-climate-science-as-basis-for-emissions-reduction-goals\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"WA Court Affirms Best Available Climate Science as Basis for Emissions Reduction Goals"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/","name":"Climate Law Blog","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#organization","name":"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/files\/2023\/02\/21-SabinBlog_Banner-1.png","width":2752,"height":260,"caption":"Sabin Center for Climate Change Law"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/x.com\/sabincenter"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/#\/schema\/person\/feb003a23e39abcdba2d22ac5d5cf26f","name":"Jennifer Klein","url":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/author\/jklein4\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3356","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1434"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3356"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3356\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3356"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3356"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/climatechange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3356"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}