What scholars referred to as a climate change litigation ‘explosion’ in 2015 has today become an established movement which is unlikely to stop in the near future: worldwide, over a thousand lawsuits have been launched regarding responsibility for the dangers of climate change. Since the beginning of this trend in transnational climate litigation scholars have warned that the separation of powers is threatened where judges interfere with the politically hot issue of climate change. This article uses Jürgen Habermas's political theory on deliberative democracy to reconstruct the tension between law and politics generated by these lawsuits. This reconstruction affords a better understanding of the implications of climate change litigation: while the role of the judiciary as such remains unchanged, the trend is likely to influence the democratic legitimacy of judicial lawmaking on climate change, as it indicates an increasing realization that a sound environment is a constitutional value and is therefore a prerequisite for democracy.

中文翻译：

---

法官应该制定气候变化法吗？

学者们所说的 2015 年气候变化诉讼“爆炸式增长”如今已成为一项既定运动，在不久的将来不太可能停止：全球范围内已经发起了超过一千起关于气候变化危险责任的诉讼。自从跨国气候诉讼的这一趋势开始以来，学者们就警告说，当法官干预气候变化这一政治热点问题时，三权分立就会受到威胁。本文运用于尔根·哈贝马斯关于协商民主的政治理论来重构这些诉讼所产生的法律与政治之间的紧张关系。这种重建有助于更好地理解气候变化诉讼的影响：虽然司法机构的作用保持不变，