Legal implications of the climate-health crisis: A case study analysis of the role of public health in climate litigation

carbonization, sought increased liability for climate risk-associated financial/investment activ- ity, as well as legal attribution of personhood for the environmental, or legal accountability to future generations impacted by climate change. Compatible with this finding is the temporal trend of increasing likelihood of case-driven policy change across time. Indeed, in keeping with accelerating climate change, most of the cases which directly led to the passage of new cli- mate-friendly, environmental health-rooted, or human rights-oriented legislation or legal stat- utes occurred in the past 5 years. This trend suggests maturation of climate law. Characteristics of cases Of the 1641 cases identified, the vast majority (n = 1241) were filed in the US, with only 360 filed elsewhere. The majority of the cases pursued outside the USA (90%, n = 325) were filed in high-income countries, with only 35 (10%) filed in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) [74] (Fig 2). The distribution of cases by plaintiff and defendant type (the actors against whom cases have been filed) for the 65 directly public health-linked climate litigation cases identified is depicted in Figs 3 and 4, respectively. With regards to plaintiff type, youth comprised the largest category, followed by govern- ment then individuals independent of interest groups. The data concerning defendant type depict an overwhelming majority of cases against governments, with fewer filed against corpo- rations. Nonetheless, when analyzing temporal trends across all cases (not only public health-

linked ones), we observed the number filed against corporations increased greatly over the past two years, (7 cases in 2019 and 3 in the first half of 2020, compared to one case in all of 2015). Diverse legal claims and arguments were put forth in the 65 directly public health-linked cases, involving a complex distribution of legal precedents on which accusations of wrongdo- ing were based. The cases were categorized into human rights, economic, and eco-centric focused arguments. Human rights claims predominate, with most plaintiffs equating assaults on health with what are deemed to be clear human rights violations (Fig 5). Fig 3. Public health-linked climate litigation cases by category of plaintiff. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268633.g003 PLOS ONE Public health as a legal tool in climate litigation PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268633 June 15, 2022 10 / 31