A first-of-its-kind climate change case pitting the state of Montana against a group of young plaintiffs resumed this week, as state officials sought to dispute the notion that their government has a constitutional obligation to protect its residents from the effects of climate change.

The case is the first of its kind to receive a trial in the United States. Sixteen young plaintiffs, ranging from ages 6 to 22, filed a lawsuit against the state of Montana in 2020, alleging that the state violated its own constitution by embracing fossil fuel projects and ignoring climate change.

SUPREME COURT NEWS: JUSTICES SAVE 'CLOSELY WATCHED' CASES FOR END OF JUNE

If successful, the case could serve as a precedent for residents in other states seeking to hold government officials or businesses accountable for their role in fossil fuel projects.

The case centers on the question of whether Montana’s Environmental Policy Act, which requires state agencies to weigh environmental health against the development of new energy resources, is unconstitutional since it does not allow the state to weigh the harm of additional greenhouse gas emissions or other adverse effects on climate that a new fossil fuel project will have when taking it into consideration.

Plaintiffs have alleged that MEPA, in its current form, violates a 1972 provision in Montana's constitution, which indicates that the “state and each person shall maintain and improve a clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations.”

But state officials, who began their arguments Monday, have rejected the claim, noting that the MEPA provision in question is procedural and used solely to create environmental assessments of projects, rather than issuing the actual permits that allow them to move forward.

“MEPA doesn’t permit,” Montana's Director of Environmental Quality Chris Dorrington said in his testimony. He added that there are different state laws that “allow and guide the agency” to make decisions on whether to permit new coal, oil, or gas mining projects.

MEPA is used to create environmental assessments for projects, but it does not have regulatory teeth, officials argued.

The state has tried multiple times to avoid trial, and it has twice filed requests to the Supreme Court to override previous rulings.

The plaintiffs are asking the state to set a limit on greenhouse gas emissions.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs presented their case last week, which included testimony from the youth, who alleged they had suffered harm from the fossil fuel projects.

Olivia Vesovich, a 20-year-old student at the University of Montana, told the court that her preexisting respiratory problems, coupled with wildfire smoke, have made living in the state nearly unbearable in recent years.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

At times, she said, it felt as though her lungs were on fire and that the smoke was “suffocating” her, Vesovich said in her testimony. "That sounds like a dystopian horror film, but it's not a movie. It's real life.”

“Climate change is wreaking so much havoc on our world right now, and I know that will only be getting worse," she added.