The plaintiffs -- primarily from Montana, where the case was filed in a federal court, along with others from Hawaii, Oregon, California and Florida -- named President Donald Trump and numerous federal agencies in their lawsuit.

The case targets executive orders that declared a "National Energy Emergency" and directed agencies to "unleash American energy" by accelerating oil, gas, and coal extraction on public lands while blocking clean energy projects.

It also argues the administration has unlawfully suppressed public access to federal climate science.

"These youth are standing up to challenge those executive orders as violating their rights to life, safety and health," Andrea Rodgers, a lawyer with the nonprofit Our Children's Trust, which brought the case, told AFP.

She added that the lawsuit builds on recent state-level victories.

In Montana, a judge ruled in 2023 in favor of youth plaintiffs that government's decision to limit analysis of environmental factors when deciding oil and gas permits violated their right to a clean environment.

In Hawaii, a 2024 settlement with youth activists committed the state to accelerate decarbonization of its transport sector to protect their right to a healthy climate.

At the federal level, however, youth-led climate lawsuits have yet to prevail.

The most prominent, Juliana v. United States, was filed in 2015 and dismissed last year. The Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal earlier this year.

Rodgers said the new case, Lighthiser v. United States, differs in a key way: while Juliana relied on an implied right to a safe climate, Lighthiser claims an explicit violation of the Fifth Amendment, which says no person shall be deprived of life or liberty without due process of law.

Lead plaintiff Eva Lighthiser, 19, from Livingston, Montana, says her life has been disrupted by climate-driven floods that damaged roads and bridges, forcing her family to relocate.

Wildfires and heat waves have also affected her health and caused deep anxiety about the future, the complaint adds.

Beyond seeking to overturn executive orders that promote fossil fuel drilling, the plaintiffs want to restore congressionally mandated climate science efforts, including the National Climate Assessment. The Trump administration recently dismissed its roughly 400-member author team.

Some critics argue these issues should be left to elected officials -- not the courts. But Rodgers countered: "There's really a place for all three branches of government to get involved in resolving the climate crisis."

"That's not to say the judiciary should set policy -- but it must ensure the political branches act within their constitutional lane. That's what we're asking the court to do here."