What do you think?
Rate this book
The Green Amendment: The People's Fight for a Clean, Safe, and Healthy Environment
A veteran environmentalist shares her roadmap to a healthier world—one that uses the law to empower activists and provide hope for communities everywhere.
We have reached a critical tipping point in our fight for the environment: Corporations profit off climate change, natural disasters devastate homes, and the most vulnerable suffer the health effects of pollution. Yet our laws are designed to accommodate this destruction rather than prevent it. Without government support, it's no wonder people feel powerless. But there is a solution.
In The Green Amendment, veteran environmentalist Maya K. van Rossum presents her radically simple plan for a green future: bypass local laws and turn to the ultimate authority—our state and federal constitutions—to ensure we have the right to a healthy environment.
Through compelling interviews with activists on the ground, clear evidence from experts, and heartbreaking stories from those hit hardest by environmental ruin, The Green Amendment lights the path forward. In this updated edition of her trailblazing 2017 book, van Rossum invites readers to join the movement by sharing:
-Why Green Amendments work where other movements have failed
-How to position Green Amendments and what specific language offers the strongest legal protections
-How to argue in favor of environmental rights, and the economic and health benefits that will help activists make the case
-How Green Amendments address the crucial intersection of environmentalism and anti-racism
-What everyone—from artists and students to scientists and lawyer—can do to further the cause
With the power of The Green Amendment, we can claim our environmental rights, ensuring a clean, safe Earth for generations to come.
We have reached a critical tipping point in our fight for the environment: Corporations profit off climate change, natural disasters devastate homes, and the most vulnerable suffer the health effects of pollution. Yet our laws are designed to accommodate this destruction rather than prevent it. Without government support, it's no wonder people feel powerless. But there is a solution.
In The Green Amendment, veteran environmentalist Maya K. van Rossum presents her radically simple plan for a green future: bypass local laws and turn to the ultimate authority—our state and federal constitutions—to ensure we have the right to a healthy environment.
Through compelling interviews with activists on the ground, clear evidence from experts, and heartbreaking stories from those hit hardest by environmental ruin, The Green Amendment lights the path forward. In this updated edition of her trailblazing 2017 book, van Rossum invites readers to join the movement by sharing:
-Why Green Amendments work where other movements have failed
-How to position Green Amendments and what specific language offers the strongest legal protections
-How to argue in favor of environmental rights, and the economic and health benefits that will help activists make the case
-How Green Amendments address the crucial intersection of environmentalism and anti-racism
-What everyone—from artists and students to scientists and lawyer—can do to further the cause
With the power of The Green Amendment, we can claim our environmental rights, ensuring a clean, safe Earth for generations to come.
- GenresEnvironmentNonfiction
356 pages, Paperback
Published November 1, 2022
9 people are currently reading
96 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
June 29, 2023
My inbox floods daily with opportunities, campaigns, volunteer days, and fundraising appeals, and I participate in a lot of them, and I am not even exhausted yet, but I am assailed by doubt. Is the work working? Am I throwing myself behind the right things? I have no idea. I have no idea!
Enter this book, another chance to consider not so much my place within the movement but the vectors of movements themselves. I think it’s a compelling, solid argument for why state constitutional amendments protecting peoples’ rights to an abundant, healthy environment have a trump card judicial/legislative power that you can see exercised in two states who have such amendments (MT & PA). I especially enjoyed the deep dive into why NYC water is the best, both because it surprised me (I thought it was just that New Yorkers think everything of theirs is the best!) and because it may actually be true. A city that thinks in terms of watersheds in the long term? That actually sounds like the future!
Now I admit, intimately, I am totally sick of rights talk. The rights of gun owners, the rights of the unborn, the rights of property owners. What are rights about, without responsibility? Responsibility to steward, protect, and care? Rights absent responsibilities sounds like US military campaigns to bring “human rights” to the Middle East, you know, like Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay prisons. We’re experts in rights, you see! So you’ll have to forgive me if fighting for rights doesn’t thrill my soul. But I can really appreciate how they may be effective in the Western colonizer paperwork context we’re working in, unlike responsibilities, which really don’t have a place in constitutions as far as I can tell. That said, I can see how a people’s right to a thriving environment is a kind of subversion of our typical understanding of rights, namely, the rights of business to pollute. And the implications of a Green Amendment are the state’s responsibilities to steward place and shelter it. Am I picking nits at this late hour? See reference above to torturing inmates for more detail.
One star dropped for her unintentional but unacceptable tone deafness regarding racism and environmental justice. I am moved by van Rossum’s own legal work, but I don’t believe she has yet done the personal work to more fully evolve on that score. Examples: Brown v. Board completely desegregated the nation’s schools - and that’s a wrap? The Seattle Times is currently running a series on local school segregation post Brown, and I grew up in the 90s in a very segregated place, so no, with just minuscule two examples I know that’s not true. Experts know even more why that’s not true. When you say something ended well to bolster your argument, but in fact it didn’t end well or even end, you help create cynics. It sure seems like the reason there are so many conspiracy theorists today isn’t strictly because of social media and all - it’s because we’ve been lied to so much, it makes people doubt what the powerful say. When you catch a glimmer of propaganda, you can’t just write it off, and at scale that’s pretty destabilizing to civic life. Then on a more petty count than that, a reference to her solar powered Tesla (good for you sister, I’m sure you’ll get to heaven now) and several other very white remarks about not being afraid to point out environmental racism, these sounded a bit like second edition updates, like afterthoughts, and their diction seemed to assume that her readers would be white, older, and require more pleading to be convinced environmental justice exists. I just think she needs more personal relationships with non white people, and I mean deeply personal enough that they force her to reckon with herself more. Or a faster route: get a BIPOC team to edit the book! Even swifter.
Still, I’m going to join her organization and see what I can do up here, because it sounds worthwhile to me, and we’re clearly running out of time.
Enter this book, another chance to consider not so much my place within the movement but the vectors of movements themselves. I think it’s a compelling, solid argument for why state constitutional amendments protecting peoples’ rights to an abundant, healthy environment have a trump card judicial/legislative power that you can see exercised in two states who have such amendments (MT & PA). I especially enjoyed the deep dive into why NYC water is the best, both because it surprised me (I thought it was just that New Yorkers think everything of theirs is the best!) and because it may actually be true. A city that thinks in terms of watersheds in the long term? That actually sounds like the future!
Now I admit, intimately, I am totally sick of rights talk. The rights of gun owners, the rights of the unborn, the rights of property owners. What are rights about, without responsibility? Responsibility to steward, protect, and care? Rights absent responsibilities sounds like US military campaigns to bring “human rights” to the Middle East, you know, like Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo Bay prisons. We’re experts in rights, you see! So you’ll have to forgive me if fighting for rights doesn’t thrill my soul. But I can really appreciate how they may be effective in the Western colonizer paperwork context we’re working in, unlike responsibilities, which really don’t have a place in constitutions as far as I can tell. That said, I can see how a people’s right to a thriving environment is a kind of subversion of our typical understanding of rights, namely, the rights of business to pollute. And the implications of a Green Amendment are the state’s responsibilities to steward place and shelter it. Am I picking nits at this late hour? See reference above to torturing inmates for more detail.
One star dropped for her unintentional but unacceptable tone deafness regarding racism and environmental justice. I am moved by van Rossum’s own legal work, but I don’t believe she has yet done the personal work to more fully evolve on that score. Examples: Brown v. Board completely desegregated the nation’s schools - and that’s a wrap? The Seattle Times is currently running a series on local school segregation post Brown, and I grew up in the 90s in a very segregated place, so no, with just minuscule two examples I know that’s not true. Experts know even more why that’s not true. When you say something ended well to bolster your argument, but in fact it didn’t end well or even end, you help create cynics. It sure seems like the reason there are so many conspiracy theorists today isn’t strictly because of social media and all - it’s because we’ve been lied to so much, it makes people doubt what the powerful say. When you catch a glimmer of propaganda, you can’t just write it off, and at scale that’s pretty destabilizing to civic life. Then on a more petty count than that, a reference to her solar powered Tesla (good for you sister, I’m sure you’ll get to heaven now) and several other very white remarks about not being afraid to point out environmental racism, these sounded a bit like second edition updates, like afterthoughts, and their diction seemed to assume that her readers would be white, older, and require more pleading to be convinced environmental justice exists. I just think she needs more personal relationships with non white people, and I mean deeply personal enough that they force her to reckon with herself more. Or a faster route: get a BIPOC team to edit the book! Even swifter.
Still, I’m going to join her organization and see what I can do up here, because it sounds worthwhile to me, and we’re clearly running out of time.
August 28, 2022
I would like to thank Disruption Books for providing me with an ARC.
Fighting for a brighter and greener future has become more and more important as time goes on. I think this book does a great job at illustrating this need for creating change. It discusses the ways that companies, especially fracking companies, have used legislation for profit and to avoid consequences for their actions. They use the law to screw over the people in multiple ways. While there is a lot discussed in this book that feels very frustrating and very disheartening, this book also brings hope and a path that can be taken to fight against and to protect our world from greedy corporations. Going into this book, I already knew a decent amount environmentalism and many of the topics discussed in the Green Amendment, but it does provide great information and information I'm not as familiar with. I also loved the discussions on legal action that should be taken and the ways that people across the U.S. can take legal actions in their own states. I believe this book will be great for anyone who is interested in this fight. Anybody who is already familiar with these topics and anyone new to these topics can enjoy and learn something from this book.
Fighting for a brighter and greener future has become more and more important as time goes on. I think this book does a great job at illustrating this need for creating change. It discusses the ways that companies, especially fracking companies, have used legislation for profit and to avoid consequences for their actions. They use the law to screw over the people in multiple ways. While there is a lot discussed in this book that feels very frustrating and very disheartening, this book also brings hope and a path that can be taken to fight against and to protect our world from greedy corporations. Going into this book, I already knew a decent amount environmentalism and many of the topics discussed in the Green Amendment, but it does provide great information and information I'm not as familiar with. I also loved the discussions on legal action that should be taken and the ways that people across the U.S. can take legal actions in their own states. I believe this book will be great for anyone who is interested in this fight. Anybody who is already familiar with these topics and anyone new to these topics can enjoy and learn something from this book.
July 3, 2025
The basic argument of this book is: bad industrial pollution still exists and existing laws aren't adequate. Therefore, states should pass a "green amendment"- an amendment in a state constitution providing that all citizens have the right to a clean environment.
This book is useful in some ways: it shows that despite all the media chitchat about "deindustrialization", harmful industrial pollution is still a threat to the public's air and water. And she shows how existing environmental laws are sometimes inadequate to fix the problem. I was also impressed by this book's discussion of "green amendment" case law in Montana and Pennsylvania; even though I have read some of these cases, I wasn't really aware of the factual background behind them.
Having said that, I'm not really persuaded that a green amendment is as strong a remedy as the author believes, for a couple of reasons. First, the language of such amendments is so vague that I can't imagine courts being willing to interpret it to ban everything that causes pollution. For example, automobiles are a major source of pollution, but I can't imagine any judge ordering states to tear down the highways that facilitate long-distance car commuting. Thus, courts applying a green amendment are likely to balance interests- which means that those that are NOT dominated by environmentalists might make the amendment so weak as to be useless.
Second, a green amendment could easily be misused by defenders of the status quo. For example, supporters of new highways might argue that anything that makes cars go faster actually reduces pollution by reducing congestion (an argument that is, in my opinion, false because the most car-dependent places have the highest greenhouse gas emissions from cars). Or opponents of bikes and buses might use the same argument to drive non-car uses off the roads. Or opponents of urban housing might use the threat of congestion to force new housing into car-dependent suburbs.
Third, it would seem to me that the most harmful pollution could be handled through personal injury lawsuits. In fact, the author even mentions a successful tort lawsuit in Delaware (p. 188). Why is a green amendment likely to be more effective than personal injury law? After reading this book, I am not sure.
Finally, I was surprised by the author's blind spots: that issues, issues that I would have expected her to discuss in more detail. She does not seem to have thought about any form of development that doesn't involve lots and lots of driving. I didn't see any reference to public transit or walkability, and even though she complains about alleged suburban "overdevelopment" she doesn't mention urban development as an alternative. She referred to a suburb of Trenton (Hamilton) as "America's favorite hometown" even though only 3 percent of its residents use public transit to commute and 93 percent drive or carpool.
This book is useful in some ways: it shows that despite all the media chitchat about "deindustrialization", harmful industrial pollution is still a threat to the public's air and water. And she shows how existing environmental laws are sometimes inadequate to fix the problem. I was also impressed by this book's discussion of "green amendment" case law in Montana and Pennsylvania; even though I have read some of these cases, I wasn't really aware of the factual background behind them.
Having said that, I'm not really persuaded that a green amendment is as strong a remedy as the author believes, for a couple of reasons. First, the language of such amendments is so vague that I can't imagine courts being willing to interpret it to ban everything that causes pollution. For example, automobiles are a major source of pollution, but I can't imagine any judge ordering states to tear down the highways that facilitate long-distance car commuting. Thus, courts applying a green amendment are likely to balance interests- which means that those that are NOT dominated by environmentalists might make the amendment so weak as to be useless.
Second, a green amendment could easily be misused by defenders of the status quo. For example, supporters of new highways might argue that anything that makes cars go faster actually reduces pollution by reducing congestion (an argument that is, in my opinion, false because the most car-dependent places have the highest greenhouse gas emissions from cars). Or opponents of bikes and buses might use the same argument to drive non-car uses off the roads. Or opponents of urban housing might use the threat of congestion to force new housing into car-dependent suburbs.
Third, it would seem to me that the most harmful pollution could be handled through personal injury lawsuits. In fact, the author even mentions a successful tort lawsuit in Delaware (p. 188). Why is a green amendment likely to be more effective than personal injury law? After reading this book, I am not sure.
Finally, I was surprised by the author's blind spots: that issues, issues that I would have expected her to discuss in more detail. She does not seem to have thought about any form of development that doesn't involve lots and lots of driving. I didn't see any reference to public transit or walkability, and even though she complains about alleged suburban "overdevelopment" she doesn't mention urban development as an alternative. She referred to a suburb of Trenton (Hamilton) as "America's favorite hometown" even though only 3 percent of its residents use public transit to commute and 93 percent drive or carpool.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 23, 2023
The Green Amendment: The People’s Fight for a Clean, Safe, and Healthy Environment by Maya K. Van Rossum
365 Pages
Publisher: Disruption Books
Release Date: November 1, 2022
Nonfiction, Environmental, Climate. Law, Culture
The book is divided into the following parts.
My Green Amendment Epiphany
Living in the Sacrifice Zone
The Right to a Healthy Environment
Fracking Away Our Future
Wasted
The Paving of America
Confronting the Climate Crisis
Ending Environmental Racism
You’re Not Expendable!
Can We Afford A Green Amendment?
Fighting For A Green Amendment
This book comes at a critical t time for us. If we wait much longer to makes changes for the environment, it will be too late. This is the tipping point. The author does a wonderful job pointing out the importance of climate change. The writing style is more reference than conversational but still easy to understand. If you are interested in the future of our planet, this is a great read.
https://belladonnasbooks.com/review/t...
365 Pages
Publisher: Disruption Books
Release Date: November 1, 2022
Nonfiction, Environmental, Climate. Law, Culture
The book is divided into the following parts.
My Green Amendment Epiphany
Living in the Sacrifice Zone
The Right to a Healthy Environment
Fracking Away Our Future
Wasted
The Paving of America
Confronting the Climate Crisis
Ending Environmental Racism
You’re Not Expendable!
Can We Afford A Green Amendment?
Fighting For A Green Amendment
This book comes at a critical t time for us. If we wait much longer to makes changes for the environment, it will be too late. This is the tipping point. The author does a wonderful job pointing out the importance of climate change. The writing style is more reference than conversational but still easy to understand. If you are interested in the future of our planet, this is a great read.
https://belladonnasbooks.com/review/t...
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews