International Climate Law Needs Teeth
An ICJ advisory opinion last year established that states have legal obligations to prevent significant climate harm. A new UN resolution would convert that opinion into something with consequences. It deserves to pass.
The Obsidian Desk
The doctrine is settled. The enforcement is not. That gap — between what international law says and what it can compel — is what the proposed UN resolution attempts to close.
Critics say teeth in international climate law will deter ambition. The opposite is true. Ambition without enforcement has produced two decades of pledges that sovereigns did not need to keep.
Sources & Further Reading
