German climate activists are taking their government to court over what they deem “unconstitutional” climate policies, aiming to build on a landmark victory from three years ago that they hoped would prompt Europe’s biggest polluter to act swiftly.
The activists argue that the new climate law is inadequate, that recent updates have made it harder to enforce, and that the persistent inaction from the transport ministry, which has repeatedly failed to meet its emissions targets, will impose harsh measures on vulnerable groups in the future.
“Our last win made it clear that we have a right to climate action,” said Luisa Neubauer, a prominent climate activist and leader in the Fridays for Future school strike movement. “Yet three years later, the government is failing to take necessary action.”
Germany, a significant car manufacturer that relies on coal for one-quarter of its electricity, is on course to miss its target of reducing planet-warming pollutants by 65% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. In 2021, the country’s top court ruled a previous version of its climate law partly unconstitutional when Neubauer and other activists successfully challenged it.
The court’s ruling, combined with pressure from activists, led the previous government to update the law, aiming to cut emissions faster and include specific targets for each sector. However, this year, under the influence of the market-liberal Free Democrats party—a minor coalition partner that oversees the transport and finance ministries—the current government removed the sectoral targets, weakened the requirements for corrective actions, and reduced the legal pressure to plan beyond 2030.
Liz Hicks, a law researcher at the University of Münster, noted that “conflicting visions” on climate action within the governing coalition have complicated the enforcement of the 2021 ruling. “The latest amendment makes it more difficult to implement the targets in the Climate Protection Act, even if they exist on paper.”
The previous court ruling deemed Germany’s old climate law unconstitutional because it violated “intertemporal freedoms”—shifting the burden of swift action onto future generations—but stopped short of declaring that the government had completely failed in its obligations up to that point.
Since then, Germany’s scientific watchdogs have repeatedly identified gaps between targets and actions in various sectors, such as transport and buildings. The Council of Experts on Climate Change, a body established by the government after the climate law was first introduced, stated that the transport ministry’s action plan to compensate for its 2022 shortcomings was too weak to even warrant a formal assessment.
The activists contend that the government has “wastefully used up the carbon budget” in the three years since the last court ruling. They cite the rejection of cost-effective policies to reduce pollution, such as implementing a general speed limit on motorways, as missed opportunities.
Maxim Bönnemann, the editor-in-chief of Verfassungsblog, an academic publication on German constitutional law, said the constitutional complaint aims to “give teeth” to the principle of intertemporal freedom. “Germany is unlikely to meet its climate targets for 2030, which means that young people will have to accept significant restrictions on their freedoms in the future if Germany does not make its climate policy more ambitious today.”
A spokesperson for the German climate and economy ministry stated that the federal government is “convinced” that the amendment to the law in April is constitutional. The spokesperson highlighted that the amendment improves the evaluation of climate policy by introducing an annual forecast of emissions reductions, allowing for more reports by the Council of Experts on Climate Change, and requiring adjustments if targets are missed for two consecutive years.
“Additionally, every new government must adopt a comprehensive climate protection programme within the first 12 months of its term in office,” the spokesperson added.
The complaint, filed by Fridays for Future along with other environmental groups such as Greenpeace and Germanwatch, also argues that people in rural areas and other socially disadvantaged groups will bear the brunt of the stringent measures needed to compensate for the lack of action today.
“Today’s inactivity violates fundamental rights,” said Roda Verheyen, a lawyer for the activists. “We are running into a situation where freedom is just a question of the purse.”
The complaint references a recent victory at the European Court of Human Rights by 2,400 older Swiss women, who demanded that Switzerland do its fair share to combat climate change, citing their demographic’s higher likelihood of dying during heatwaves. The court partially ruled in their favor, finding that the Swiss government had violated their human rights with inadequate policy, but Swiss lawmakers rejected the ruling.
Neubauer pointed out that the situation in Germany mirrors that of many other liberal democracies and expressed hope that the case would bridge the gap between rhetoric and action globally. “In theory, our governments applaud climate action. In practice, they keep delaying necessary measures
