Want to hear a joke? The International Court of Justice (ICJ) dropped a landmark decision on Wednesday, July 23. According to the UN court, wealthy countries must do more to fight climate change – if they don’t, other nations can sue them. And climate activists celebrated across the globe.
So, that was the setup. Now, are you ready for the punchline? The ICJ has no authority to enforce this “non-binding” ruling. The Court has no compulsory jurisdiction over any nation that hasn’t specifically accepted it, and the US withdrew its consent in 1986. The White House response is – as you’ve probably already guessed – we’re sticking with America First.
Dancing in the Street
According to the ICJ’s “Advisory Opinion,” wealthier nations must shoulder a greater share of the cost of addressing climate change. Should they fail to do so, developing nations have the right to sue for damages from the impacts of climate change, like buildings destroyed by extreme weather. Additionally, governments are responsible for the climate impact of companies operating in their countries, the Court ruled. “States must cooperate to achieve concrete emission reduction targets,” Judge Yuji Iwasawa said. Those that don’t comply could be liable for “full reparations to injured states in the form of restitution, compensation and satisfaction provided that the general conditions of the law of state responsibility are met.”
And the climate activists are celebrating. Some who gathered outside the ICJ literally danced in the street.
“I didn't expect it to be this good,” said Ralph Regenvanu, the climate minister for the island nation of Vanuatu. “This is a huge win for climate vulnerable states. It's a huge win for Vanuatu, which led this case and is going to change the face of climate advocacy,” said barrister Jennifer Robinson at Doughty Street Chambers, who represented Vanuatu and the Marshall Islands.
Vishal Prasad of the Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change sees it as forward momentum for the cause. “I think it sends a strong message for all of us and to young people everywhere,” he said. “There is still hope and there is a chance and there's a reason for us to keep fighting.”
White House Shrugs Off the UN – Again
White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers told reporters: “As always, President Trump and the entire Administration is committed to putting America first and prioritizing the interests of everyday Americans.” In short, don’t expect any changes from the US.
But wait, doesn’t that mean the US is going to get sued by tiny nations after every hurricane, tsunami, or drought? Probably not. The thing about the UN is it’s a group with voluntary membership and participation. The International Court of Justice isn’t the final arbiter of the law with actual enforcement authority, like the Supreme Court. It’s an advisory group that issues opinions and suggestions, which member nations may or may not follow. As for any power to punish, that only extends as far as the country to be punished chooses to participate.
Should the Trump administration not want to pay out for damages or for ignoring the edict, all it has to do is, well, continue to disregard the ruling. Then, if someone brings a case before the ICJ, the US could simply refuse to recognize it. Sure, if things get too unpleasant, the UN Security Council could try to impose its will through economic sanctions or even the use of force. But that’s an extreme measure for a non-binding rule from the ICJ – and even then, the US is one of five nations with the power to veto any such resolution. So, even if the UN did try to push the issue and threaten sanctions, all the US has to say is “no thanks.”
For those who only tune in to the anti-Trump media, it may seem like the president is destroying America’s international relations. But the US – under Democrats and Republicans alike – has been ignoring the International Court of Justice whenever that’s the most convenient choice for decades. There’s no reason to assume things will be any different now.
.jpg&w=1920&q=75)
