Supporters of the climate litigation campaign were dealt a second setback in as many weeks after the Biden Administration came out in opposition to the plaintiffs in the Juliana v. United States lawsuit.

The lawsuit was originally field in 2015 by a group of children and adults with the support of Our Children’s Trust, an activist group funded by wealthy foundations that has sought to force the U.S. government to mandate a phase out of the use of fossil fuels in the country. It was dismissed in early 2020 over a lacking of standing with a federal court ruling that the plaintiffs’ case “for redress must be presented to the political branches of government.”

The U.S. Department of Justice is now requesting a federal appeals court to block the plaintiffs’ latest effort to revive the case.

Bloomberg Law reports:

“The Biden administration is urging a federal court to reject young plaintiffs’ request for ‘a second bite at the apple’ after their recent defeat in a closely watched lawsuit that says the government’s support of fossil fuel development is unconstitutional.

‘The Ninth Circuit issued a clear mandate to this Court to dismiss the Complaint for lack of Article III jurisdiction,’ Justice Department lawyers told the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon on Tuesday. ‘It did not in any way invite Plaintiffs to amend the Complaint.’”

It’s the latest and most high profile defeat for Our Children’s Trust, which has previously seen its cases tossed out by courts in Florida, North Carolina, and Washington State. Our Children’s Trust, which has filed cases in numerous other states in an attempt to force government action on climate change, is supported by the Rockefellers – the network of activist groups that have manufactured the entire climate litigation campaign – and the Wallace Global Fund, which has led divestment campaigns against traditional energy companies and supports other activist groups like 350.org and As You Sow.

In the weeks leading up to this latest ruling, other activist groups and plaintiffs’ attorneys have come out in support of the now-defeated Juliana case.

The ruling that policies which address climate change should come from political leaders, not the courts, was echoed in an op-ed published on Friday in Bloomberg Law by former Interior Secretary and Colorado Attorney General Gale Norton and former Chief Deputy Colorado Attorney General Martha Whitmore, who wrote:

“Courts and juries are not equipped to handle complex scientific questions requiring sophisticated and multifaceted remedies. Rather, federal agencies do have such capabilities. Similarly, Congress is equipped to balance competing interests, such as consumer costs and the economic impact for industries and jobs.”

The Biden Administration’s opposition to the Juliana case follows a United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit panel’s rejection of New York City’s climate lawsuit last week , which similarly ruled that federal agencies and the legislative arena, not the courts, are the best venue to address climate change. That decision came on the heels of a court hearing last month in Massachusetts where the attorney general’s case faces a possible dismissal over constitutional violations, in what has shaped up to be rough start to 2021 for the climate litigation campaign.

While the Biden campaign touted its support for litigation last year, the Department of Justice left no doubt about its views of the Juliana case, calling it a “futile” attempt to revive it in its court filing:

“‘Because the Ninth Circuit has already determined that Plaintiffs’ request for declaratory judgment ‘is not substantially likely to mitigate the plaintiffs’ asserted concrete injuries,’ and thus fails the first prong of the redressability test … Plaintiffs’ proposal to assert a substantially identical request for relief must be denied as futile,’ the filing states.” (emphasis added)

The development is the latest example of the Biden Administration’s apparent reluctance thus far to directly involve itself in the climate litigation campaign. Its recently released infrastructure and climate plan made no mention of litigation, but did propose funding electric vehicles, research & development and “infrastructure resilience.” Additionally, during the confirmation hearing for Attorney General Merrick Garland in February, there was no discussion about climate litigation.