Search

Climate change litigation has become an increasingly common feature of the modern legal landscape. Populism has, likewise, become commonplace within the political landscape, and the interaction between populism and the courts is the subject of a growing literature. This chapter considers the connections linking the two fields, considering in particular whether climate change litigation can be said to be populist in nature. Based on a survey of relevant cases, I develop two categories – populist legalism and legal populism – the former relating to the nature of the parties involved in litigation and the latter to narrative style employed in legal submissions. I argue that there are both benefits and distinct risks in borrowing from the populist playbook. While the chapter is focused on climate change litigation, its framework and conclusions are likely to be more broadly applicable to other policy fields examined by law and courts scholars.