At DeSmogBlog, Justin Mikulka writes—Delta 5 Trial Set To Make History With “Necessity Defense” for Climate Action:

In September 2014, five individuals — now known as the Delta 5 — blockaded a train transporting Bakken shale oil at the Delta rail yard in Everett, Washington. This action was taken to oppose the known risks of the explosive Bakken oil and the risks that fossil fuels pose to the climate. [...]

After stopping the train for eight hours, the five protesters were removed and arrested and charged with Criminal Trespass and Blocking or Delaying a Train. The Delta 5 plan to use the “necessity defense” to defend their actions.

The necessity defense essentially argues that violation of the law by stopping the train is justified because it was done to “avoid a harm which social policy deems greater than the harm resulting from violation of law.” [...]

The trial is set to begin tomorrow, January 11th.

On January 6, the judge issued a ten-page order denying the defendants the use of the necessity defense. In that order the judge acknowledged the reality of harm from climate change but denied the necessity defense with the following explanation:

“General harms by global warming are obvious—and potentially catastrophic - if government and individuals fail to act. But such generalized harm - even though it is extreme, cannot be legally cognizable because it is impossible to quantify the societal benefits of defendants’ illegal acts as they relate to the harm averted. Therefore, necessity is unavailable as a defense.”

Lawyers for the Delta 5 quickly filed a Motion to Reconsider, and to the surprise of many involved, the judge reversed his decision and is now allowing the necessity defense. [...]