When Craig Segall ’07 was an undergraduate at the University of Chicago, he spent his summers on a mountaintop studying the effects of climate change on high-alpine snow. What he discovered alarmed him. Rising temperatures were shrinking the snow packs, severely disrupting the food sources of the surrounding bird and plant life.

Today, amid a groundswell of attention being paid to global warming, Segall is one of several students at Stanford’s Environmental Law Clinic representing clients who are working on solutions. Through multiple legal tacks, the clinic is representing organizations and individuals trying to effect changes in public policy and ultimately bring global warming even further into the public consciousness.

In February, the clinic filed an amicus brief on behalf of U.S. Senator John Kerry and U.S. Representative Jay Inslee in support of environmental groups suing the Bush administration (Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, and Greenpeace, Inc. v. Brennan, et al.). The brief contends that the administration failed to issue critical data about climate change in violation of the Global Change Research Act of 1990.

Under the guidance of the clinic’s director, Deborah A. “Debbie” Sivas ‘87, Segall worked with Senator Kerry’s office to outline and write the brief. Along the way, Segall tracked down a key figure in the climate change debate: Rick Piltz, a former government scientist who has alleged that a White House official selectively edited scientific documents on climate change. Piltz agreed to be a declarant in the case this April—a major coup for the clinic’s clients.

“Partly this case is about visibility,” says Sivas. “It’s also about trying to get information out there to the public, policymakers, and lawmakers. Our clients are fighting to have federal agencies internalize these issues and do something about them.”

Another line of attack is fuel standards, also known as CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy). The clinic represents the lead petitioner, the Center for Biological Diversity, in a suit being brought against the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The suit alleges that NHTSA’s new mileage standards for light trucks are well below what is technologically possible and fails to address global climate change. More specifically, the suit contends that the standards violate the National Environmental Policy Act.

On a more local level—with a potential ripple effect nationally— clinic students are representing clients grappling with the implications of the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which requires the state to turn back greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels and also to prevent utilities from buying energy from highpollution producers. On behalf of its clients in this matter, the clinic will be offering comments to the California Air Resources Board, which is responsible for implementing the legislation.

“We represent clients trying to push the government toward action in different ways. Our students are learning that creative lawyering means looking for any lever we can,” says Sivas.