Osborn-Wright, Claire2024-05-202024-05-202024-05-20102 Or. L. Rev. 270196-2043https://hdl.handle.net/1794/2947582 pagesThis Article explains why the Ninth Circuit’s opinion that the Juliana plaintiffs do not possess standing to obtain their requested declaratory judgment is incorrect. Part I addresses the knowledge of climate scientists, the U.S. government, and the fossil fuel industry, of the existence, causes, and effects of global warming. Part II discusses the U.S. government’s failure to regulate the fossil fuel industry, reduce federal subsidies to the industry, and hold the industry accountable for global warming. Part III explains the fossil fuel industry’s strategy for denying responsibility for global warming. Part IV discusses the opinions of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon and Ninth Circuit in the case of Juliana v. United States. Part V explains the many reasons why the Ninth Circuit’s opinion that the plaintiffs do not possess standing to obtain a declaratory judgment is incorrect.en-USAll Rights Reserved.Juliana v. United StatesClimate changeGlobal warmingFossil fuelDisinformationGreenwashingOregonArticle