Domestic Litigation as a Form of Enforcing Paris Agreement Commitments: A Comparative Perspective

The Paris Agreement, the international community's latest and most ambitious effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, is predicated on a "bottom up" approach, whereby Parties to the Agreement set their own reduction goals and the methods they will choose to achieve them. Consequently, the Agreement does not envisage a role for international courts in enforcing reductions to greenhouse gas emissions. This article explores the possible role of domestic litigation in enforcing Paris Agreement commitments by comparing American and Australian jurisprudence on the topic. While there have been some notable successes by environmental groups in each country, whether litigation has created any meaningful reduction in emissions remains unclear. However, this article argues that there will continue to be a role for litigation in the United States and Australia if they are to reach their Paris Agreement commitments.