Sagoonick v. State of Alaska II was filed by 8 Alaska youth at the Superior Court for the State of Alaska, Third Judicial District at Anchorage.  

The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case.  

The youth plaintiffs filed their opposition to the state's motion to dismiss, urging the court to deny the motion and allow the case to proceed to trial. The plaintiffs' brief underscores the profound harms Alaska’s youth are already experiencing due to climate pollution from fossil fuel development and illustrates that the Alaska LNG Project, which would significantly escalate climate pollution for decades, would cause them further, additional, and mounting harms. The youth’s brief highlights that in two previous youth-led constitutional climate cases led by Our Children’s Trust, Kanuk v. State, Department of Natural Resources and Sagoonick v. State I, the Alaska Supreme Court instructed that a challenge to a specific project, like the Alaska LNG Project, would allow Alaska’s courts to decide the rights of Alaska’s youth under the State Constitution.  

The defendants filed a reply brief in support of their motion to dismiss.  

The parties appeared before Judge Dani R. Crosby of the Superior Court of Alaska. Andrew Welle, lead attorney to the plaintiffs, argued that the youth plaintiffs are currently facing a health emergency due to devastating impacts such as flooding, wildfires, and declining salmon populations because of existing levels of climate pollution. “With full knowledge of these dangers, their government has codified a law requiring the State to develop the Alaska LNG Project, which would triple Alaska’s climate pollution for decades, locking in additional escalating and irreversible harms to the youth” he stated. This lawsuit seeks to vindicate their rights under Alaska’s Constitution to equal access to and sustainable yield of public trust resources and a climate that sustains life, liberty, and dignity. The youth seek to stop the Alaska LNG Project and prevent the harms it would cause them.  

On March 11, 2025, Judge Dani R. Crosby of the Superior Court of Alaska granted the State’s motion to dismiss the case, stating that the state’s policy to advance the Alaska Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) Project is beyond judicial review. 

Andrew Welle, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, responded to the ruling, saying, “Today’s ruling is a clear miscarriage of justice with enormous implications. Alaska’s Constitution expressly guarantees equal access to and sustainable yield of the critical natural resources Alaska’s youth need to sustain their lives, health, and cultures. Today’s decision eviscerates these protections by placing not only the Alaska LNG Project but all natural resource management decisions beyond review by Alaska’s Courts, upending decades of precedent.” 

In response to the court granting the state’s motion to dismiss, the youth plaintiffs filed an appeal to the state’s highest court, asking for a fair opportunity to be heard and present their case.  

The youth plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary injunction at the Alaska Supreme Court to stop the transfer of the Alaska LNG Project to a private developer until their claims have been heard in court. 

On March 27, 2025, the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) quietly rushed a transfer of majority ownership of the Alaska LNG Project to the private development company Glenfarne Group in a closed-door, executive session. The meeting took place with less than 24-hours' notice to the public and no notice to the Sagoonick II youth Plaintiffs. After the meeting, AGDC issued a press release confirming it had just entered “definitive agreements for Glenfarne to become majority owner of the Alaska LNG Project” and “lead its development to construction and operations of the entire project.” AGDC has stated that the terms of the agreements will not be released to the public. According to AGDC, the Alaska LNG Project is fully permitted and can move into construction quickly. 

The State filed its response to the youth plaintiffs’ motion. The State did not contest any of the evidence supporting the youth’s request to pause the Alaska LNG Project transfer or their legal arguments that the project violates their rights under Alaska’s Constitution.  

In a brief order without any explanation of its reasoning, the Alaska Supreme Court denied the youth plaintiffs’ request to stop the transfer while their constitutional appeal goes forward.  

Attorneys for the youth plaintiffs filed opening arguments with the Alaska Supreme Court, appealing the Anchorage Superior Court’s dismissal of their constitutional climate lawsuit. In their appeal, the Youth argue that the lower court's ruling undermines the courts’ constitutional role and immunizes harmful government actions that threaten their future from constitutional challenge. 

A group of Alaska legislators, joined by the League of Women Voters of Alaska, also filed an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief in support of the youth’s right to be heard in court, emphasizing that Alaska’s Constitution requires courts to hear and resolve claims challenging the constitutionality of laws passed by the state’s political branches. 

After the State submits its brief on appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court, the youth will file a reply brief. Once the briefing is complete, the Court will schedule an oral argument on the appeal. Following oral arguments, the youth will await a decision on their appeal, which will determine whether they will have an opportunity to present their evidence at trial.