July 16, 2026: Youth Plaintiffs File En Banc Petition at Ninth Circuit

The youth plaintiffs filed a petition asking the full Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear the case, arguing that the three-judge panel's decision is the first circuit court opinion in U.S. history to deny Article III judicial power to review an unconstitutional executive order, making this a case of exceptional importance that warrants en banc review. 

The petition identifies three fundamental errors in the panel's June 2 decision: 

Disregard of the factual record. The panel ignored uncontested evidence and the district court's own findings — including that the executive orders will generate an additional 205 million metric tons of CO2 annually by 2027, rising to 510 million metric tons annually by 2035, and that implementation is already underway across federal agencies. Rather than accepting these findings as true, as required at the motion-to-dismiss stage, the panel called the link between the orders and plaintiffs' injuries "mere conjecture." 

Conflict with recent Supreme Court precedent. The panel's reasoning conflicts with recent Supreme Court decisions striking down Trump's tariff and birthright citizenship executive orders under the same legal standards — decisions the panel did not cite. 

Circuit split. By holding that courts lack any power to review the executive orders, the panel put the Ninth Circuit at odds with the D.C., First, and Fourth Circuits, all of which have recently upheld the right to challenge executive orders on constitutional grounds.