Youth Plaintiffs Fight to Stop the Alaska LNG Project and Trump’s Directive to “Unleash Alaska’s Resource Potential”  

By Eillin Delapaz
April 14, 2025

On his first day back in office, President Donald Trump issued a sweeping declaration: a so-called “National Energy Emergency.” The disconnect? The U.S. is currently producing more energy than any country in history, with surpluses so large that much of it is destined for export, not domestic use. The real emergency isn’t a lack of energy. It’s the climate crisis, and in Alaska, that emergency is escalating at terrifying speed.  

Trump’s Gift to Big Oil is Destruction for Ecosystems 

Trump’s Day One executive actions weren’t just symbolic, they were targeted. Alongside his energy emergency declaration, Trump signed an order titled “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential,” directing federal agencies to fast-track energy extraction and roll back critical protections across the state of Alaska.  

This includes opening up cherished and ecologically vital areas such as the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to fossil fuel development. These policies prioritize short-term corporate profits over the health and safety of Alaska’s youth and the habitability of the planet, ultimately handing the keys of our youth’s future over to Big Oil.  

The Alaska LNG Project is the centerpiece of this agenda. The 800-mile gas pipeline—one of the largest in the world, will cut through boreal forest, Arctic tundra, wetlands, and Indigenous homelands, accelerating global greenhouse gas emissions and enriching the fossil fuel industry in the process.

During his State of the Union address, Trump said, “My administration is also working on a gigantic natural gas pipeline in Alaska — among the largest in the world — where Japan, South Korea, and other nations want to be our partner with investments of trillions of dollars each.  There’s never been anything like that one.  It will be truly spectacular.  It’s all set to go.  The permitting is gotten.” 

An Existential Threat to Alaska’s Climate and Communities 

Alaska is already experiencing the devastating effects of climate change twice as fast as the global average, with Arctic Alaska warming four times as fast. Rising temperatures are causing permafrost to thaw, glaciers to recede, and once-thriving wildlife populations to collapse.  

The Alaska LNG Project would only pour fuel on the fire. According to project estimates, constructing the pipeline alone would emit 2.58 million metric tons of CO₂. That’s comparable to emissions from 561,000 gas-powered vehicles, more than are even registered in Alaska. Once operational, it would move 3.5 billion cubic feet of gas every day, tripling the state’s climate pollution for decades to come.  

This isn’t just an environmental catastrophe; it’s a direct assault on subsistence and cultural traditions that Alaska Natives rely on and have passed down for thousands of years. The project threatens vital hunting and fishing grounds, undermines traditional knowledge systems, increases the risk of displacement of villages already vulnerable to erosion and rising seas, and will drive increasing population declines, crashes, and extinctions of species Alaskans rely on to sustain their health and cultures.

Climate change is significantly impacting caribou populations in Alaska, which many tribes rely on for subsistence.  

Alaska Youth Lead the Fight in Court 

In Sagoonick v. State of Alaska II, eight young people from across Alaska are suing the state and the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) to stop the LNG project, protect their rights, and ensure a safe livable climate for all present and future generations.  

Their lawsuit challenges a state law that requires Alaska’s government to develop the LNG project. They argue that the state’s policy violates their state constitutional rights, including: 

  • Article 1, Section 7, which guarantees due process and protection of fundamental rights,  

  • Article 8, which ensures that Alaska’s natural resources are managed for the benefit of all Alaskans and future generations.  

The youth plaintiffs are asking the court to declare the law unconstitutional and prohibit the state from continuing to advance the LNG Project.  

Sagoonick v. State of Alaska II youth plaintiffs in court for their first hearing on October 15, 2024. Photo by Robin Loznak 

A Backroom Deal without Notice 

In early March 2025, in a clear miscarriage of justice, Judge Dani R. Crosby of the Superior Court of Alaska wrongly issued an order granting the State’s motion to dismiss the youths’ case, upending decades of precedent by ruling that the fossil fuel megaproject is beyond judicial review. 

This past week, as the youth were preparing their appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court, the State of Alaska through Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) quietly rushed a transfer of majority ownership of the Alaska LNG Project to a private developer - 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 Sagoonick II youth Plaintiffs. AGDC has said that the terms of the agreement will not be released to the public.   

By transferring the Project and all of its permits to a private developer, the State is greenlighting the construction and operation of the Project and the serious harms it will cause to Alaska’s youth, violating their rights.  

On April 1, 2025, the Sagoonick youth plaintiffs appealed to the State’s highest Court to stop the transfer of the Alaska LNG Project so that Alaska’s courts can determine whether the Project violates their constitutional rights before and not after it becomes a reality.   

Support Sagoonick Youth Plaintiffs! 

Support Sagoonick youth plaintiffs by signing up to follow their case, or consider making a gift to fund their continued fight. 

SIGN UP FOR OUR ONLINE MAILING LIST
SO THAT YOU GET BREAKING NEWS, CALLS TO ACTION, AND ARTICLES - LIKE THIS ONE!

Previous
Previous

Carrying the Legacy of Environmental Law and Protecting Children’s Rights to a Safe Climate 

Next
Next

Juliana v. U.S. - Ten Years of Impact