No. 126: The Treasure State

Give it up for the kids. A group of Montana students brought a case against the state in 2023 and successfully overturned a state policy disregarding greenhouse gas emissions in the decision-making process for fossil fuel permitting. The state vowed to appeal, and the ruling was recently upheld. This week, let's revisit the case and what makes it so special.

The featured job this week is for those interested in the final frontier, and I've got a new section on the government's goings-on to help you stay up to date on how our causes are faring in the new administration. There's a lot to cover, so let's dive in.

~ Greg

What we're reading

Montana’s Supreme Court handed another historic win to youth climate activists by affirming their constitutional right to a "clean and healthful environment." (Grist)

• The 6-1 ruling in Held v. Montana challenges the state’s limited review of greenhouse gas emissions in fossil fuel projects. The case in Montana was the first to make it to trial, but cases have been brought in other states around the country; Hawaii is notable for how similar its constitutional language is to Montana's.
• One thing I'll be looking for is whether the state appeals to the Supreme Court of the United States. I like the trend though:
  • After the first ruling, the Montana Attorney General called it "absurd."
  • Now, the Montana Department of Justice is saying the results of the appeal are, "disappointing, but not surprising."
  • SCOTUS is a different beast altogether, but it seems like the Montana constitution would need an amendment if they wanted to strengthen their legal position.
• Why has this case succeeded twice now? I think it had a few things going for it.
  • First, it had constitutional language behind it, and that language was expansive; you could build a decent argument for what harms a clean and healthful environment.
  • Second, and perhaps most crucially, we're seeing the impacts of climate change today. Plaintiffs need to demonstrate that they have been harmed, and had this been preventative instead of a pain being felt today, I doubt they would have succeeded.
  • Lastly, the optics are fantastic: as much as we would like to think the justice system is impartial, we bring the biases of our experiences to our work, and a group of kids fighting for their future is the kind of underdog story that resonates.
• So here's to the kids. Hopefully you don't have to fight another appeal, but if you do, we're rooting for you.

Job of the week

This week's featured company might have the coolest technology I've seen at a social impact company. SpinLaunch is pioneering a new way to launch satellites into space that doesn't require the massive amounts of fuel used in traditional rocket launches. When I say massive, I mean massive: the main booster for the Space Shuttle burned 11,000 pounds of fuel per second. Instead, SpinLaunch is building an accelerator that launches a payload similar to the way an Olympian releases a discus, and this method relies more on electricity than fossil fuels.

If you like the idea of working on the cutting edge in a high tech environment, give their careers page a look. They are primarily seeking engineers to join their team, but they also have a Director, Strategy & Corporate Development role for someone who has a background in technology leadership more generally. As a famous toy once said: to infinity and beyond!

Thanks to Hannah for sharing this company with me! If you know an inspiring company that's looking for a new team member, send me a link to their job posting.

Community roundup

• A U.S. Justice Department investigation alleged that a hacking campaign against climate activists was initiated by a lobbying group working for ExxonMobil. Both the lobbying group and ExxonMobil denied any knowledge of the hacking campaign, which surfaced private emails in an effort to discredit scientists. (NPR)
• Seattle voters are considering two social housing proposals that would help subsidize housing for low-income residents. (Axios)
  • Voters created a social housing developer two years ago, and the current proposals determine how to fund it: by adding a payroll tax on employees earning more than $1 million per year, or by transferring money from an existing payroll tax initiative. The latter would raise about one-fifth the amount of money as the former.
• The Sacklers have reached a tentative deal with multiple state attorneys general to settle their opioid lawsuits. The Supreme Court rejected an earlier deal because it would have granted the Sacklers immunity to future lawsuits; in this new deal, states would receive a settlement but be obligated to set aside a legal-defense fund for future lawsuits. (NYT)
  • This fund could still be depleted quickly, and additional claimants must agree to a deal. Part of the issue with all these lawsuits – many of which have been around for years – is that money is not reaching the victims. The point of reaching a deal, however imperfect, is to start getting money to the people who need it.
• Jaguar Land Rover has invested $2 million in a company called Cyclic Materials to recycle the rare earth minerals crucial to renewable energy technology and electric vehicles. BMWi has already invested in the company, as have Microsoft and Hitachi. (Electrek)

Civic corner

The volume of updates coming out of the government these days practically necessitates its own section, so here we go – I'd love to hear what you think.

• USAID has been the subject of much upheaval over the past two weeks, and this week the organization was absorbed under the State Department. Last night, its roughly 10,000 staff were placed on administrative leave. This is the largest dismissal of staff that I've seen so far and will disrupt humanitarian efforts around the globe.
  • I absolutely expect legal challenges to try to protect the employees, but I'm especially focused on how Congress responds to this and other strategic dismantling throughout the executive branch. Congress is responsible for funding the government; the Trump Administration is essentially choosing not to put the staff in place to use the funds. Is that illegal? We're probably going to find out.
• Similarly, 1,100 probationary staff at the EPA were notified that they may be terminated at any time. These employees are "probationary" because they were either hired recently or recently joined the organization from another part of the government. I'm thinking of it almost like they don't have tenured status, making it easier to let them go.
  • To put this in perspective, 1,100 employees is slightly less than 10% of the total working for the EPA.
  • Last week, the EPA dismissed all the members of its outside boards of advisers. These boards are required by law, so I imagine one of two things is going to happen: either the members are replaced with people aligned with the Trump administration's policies, or the board exists but without the necessary people to conduct business. The latter situation affects the NLRB and EEOC as I noted last week.
  • The EPA also demoted the second-in-command leaders of various EPA functions so Trump administration officials could be installed instead. Traditionally, these have been nonpartisan roles that remained in place from administration to administration.
  • Congress has to approve the new leads; the second-in-command becomes the interim lead until the new leads are approved, so by demoting the current second-in-command, the Trump administration can put its own people in charge immediately and bypass Congressional approval.
• As a reminder, federal employees were told that they can no longer work remotely and were presented with an offer to resign voluntarily.
  • Union leaders and attorneys have urged federal employees not to resign because it's not clear that the government can make good on the offer; Congress is not funded past March, and no funding has been appropriated for this purpose. According to an administration official, around 20,000 people have opted to resign already.
  • I work alongside government employees in my day job. They were already in a hiring freeze and understaffed before these executive orders. I don't want to extrapolate from a single data point, but I will say I fully expect the government to become less effective as team members are forced out or depart.

Hot job opportunities

• Customer Success Lead – Cambio – Remote
• Writer (Part-Time) – ClimateAI – Remote
• Growth Marketing Lead – Ambrook – Remote
• Sales Manager – Gridmatic – Houston, TX
• Director, Product & Markets – Reactivate – Remote
• VP of Product Innovation and Strategy – Realityworks – Eau Claire, WI
• Associate, Customer Marketing – TerraCycle – Trenton, NJ
• Customer Success Advocate, West – Transfr – Remote
• Senior Process Engineer – Blackbaud – Remote, South Carolina
• Senior Software Engineer – Schoolhouse.world – Remote

Resource of the week

Want a small action you can take to make a difference this week? Consider calling your senators and representative and make sure they take action on the issues that matter to you.

I had always heard you should call, but I didn't know how it works until this week. It's surprisingly simple: elected officials and their senior staff get a report summarizing what people are calling about. Your feedback is being categorized, so you don't need to have a long, convincing argument. You just need to state the action you'd like your senator to take. Calls can be less than a minute.

To that end, it's helpful to have a script. There's a nonprofit called 5 Calls that helps with that, and they provide the people to call based on your location. You can read more about what to expect when you call on their website. Give it a shot – you can even leave a voicemail after hours if you don't want to chat with someone on the other end of the phone.

Test your knowledge

Last week's question proved rather popular. I asked about a fairly recent Black Friday advertisement that told people: "Don't Buy This Jacket." Patagonia was the company that placed the ad in the New York Times; the intent was to draw attention to consumerism and the need to purchase fewer things of higher quality that are built to last. It's better for the planet, and if you ask me, it's better for your wallet, too.

With all the news this week about tariffs and free trade, I couldn't help but think of fair trade:

Which company announced in 2014 that it had transitioned all of the ingredients in its ice cream to Fairtrade Certified ingredients?

Email me your guess, and I'll send a couple of One Work stickers your way.

I saw my first snowfall in ten years, but it was kind of a poor showing: it was mixed in with rain, and none of it stuck. I've been waiting to see how my dog reacts to the snow since he hasn't experienced it before – c'mon, just an inch?

Maybe this morning – Portland is under a Winter Weather Advisory today.