Rights-Based Climate Litigation in Brazil: An Assessment of Constitutional Cases Before the Brazilian Supreme Court

Abstract

Abstract This article presents a systematic analysis of climate litigation in the Brazilian Supreme Court. It argues that climate litigation in Brazil is centred on the protection of human rights and the court is ready (and eager) to draw a closer connection between climate and human rights. The climate litigation movement in Brazil follows in the wake of more than 40 years of a rich environmental legal framework and jurisprudence. This long trajectory includes adopting a chapter in the 1988 Brazilian Constitution dedicated to the right to an ecologically balanced environment. The Constitution determines this is a fundamental human right, encompassing the present and future generations. Building on this context, recent climate litigation cases question how climate stability fits within this constitutional framework. As the country’s constitutional tribunal, the Supreme Court recently received important climate cases addressing Brazil’s climate policy implementation. This article proceeds in three parts. First, the article contextualizes the climate litigation movement in Brazil’s broader environmental legal framework. Second, the article describes the Supreme Court climate docket of concentrated control cases. It focuses on the human right to an ecologically balanced environment and its connections with other constitutionally protected human rights. Third, the article examines the cases’ judicial reasoning, considering how the Supreme Court addressed climate change in the decisions (interlocutory or on the merits) available thus far. The ultimate goal of this article is to deepen the understanding of how the Supreme Court approaches climate as a human right through the methodical examination of the court’s pronouncements.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.