(New York, February 16, 2026) — United Nations (UN) member states should reject pressure from the United States (U.S.) to oppose a critical UN General Assembly resolution on climate change and states’ legal obligations to protect the climate system and the rights of future generations, Climate Rights International said today. The draft resolution, sponsored by Vanuatu and based on a landmark 2025 advisory opinion on climate change by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), calls for concrete action to translate the ICJ’s legal determinations into binding and concrete climate action.

However, the Trump administration is now pressuring governments worldwide to block the resolution, claiming it poses “a major threat to U.S. industry,” and dismissing human induced climate change as exaggerated. On February 14, at the annual Munich Security Conference, U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, dismissed those committed to climate action as a “climate cult,” making clear the administration’s contempt for scientific consensus, legal obligations, and the millions already suffering from climate devastation. Rubio’s comments followed the repeal of the “Endangerment Finding” that provided the legal basis for the U.S. government to regulate emissions.

“Vanuatu and other Small Island States are facing existential threats from a climate crisis they did not cause,” said Brad Adams, Executive Director at Climate Rights International. “Countries around the world—all of whom are also facing the impacts of global warming–must stand with Vanuatu at the United Nations and oppose Trump’s bullying tactics.”

Climate Rights International commended Vanuatu for its visionary leadership in advancing climate justice through international law and multilateral action. Vanuatu spearheaded the 2023 UN General Assembly resolution requesting the ICJ advisory opinion, and is now leading efforts to translate the ICJ’s findings into concrete action. The resolution followed an extraordinary global campaign launched in 2019 by Pacific Island students, who declared: “We are taking the world’s biggest problem to the world’s biggest court.” Their moral clarity and persistence, combined with Vanuatu’s diplomatic leadership, ultimately culminated in the historic ICJ advisory opinion on climate change, which was hailed by the UN Secretary-General as “a victory for the planet, for climate justice, and for the power of young people to make a difference.”

The current draft resolution responds to the unanimous ICJ advisory opinion on climate change, which among others confirmed that:

• The 1.5°C limit is legally binding, not aspirational, and must guide all state conduct.
• States have binding obligations under customary international law to prevent foreseeable climate harm and resulting rights violations—obligations that apply to all countries, including those that have withdrawn from the Paris Agreement.
• Fossil fuel subsidies, exploration licenses, and continued production can breach international law.
• Climate harm can be attributed to individual states, and states cannot escape liability by asserting that they are only one of many releasing greenhouse gases.
• States must regulate private actors, including fossil fuel corporations whose emissions cause harm, including transboundary devastation.
• Breach of obligations triggers accountability, including cessation, guarantees of non-repetition, and reparations.

The draft resolution calls on nations to adopt climate action plans aligned with the 1.5°C limit specified in the 2015 Paris Agreement, phase out fossil fuel subsidies, and establish an International Register of Damage to record evidence and claims for reparations.

“Climate action is no longer a matter of political discretion or voluntary commitments,” Adams said. “The ICJ has made crystal clear that states have legally binding duties to protect the climate system and prevent transboundary harm.”

Last week, the State Department sent a cable to U.S. embassies dismissing the draft UN resolution as “UN overreach” based on “speculative climate models” seeking to “fabricate purported legal obligations.” This directly contradicts the unanimous findings of the world’s highest court, and the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change.

“The Trump administration’s rejection of science, facts, and law represents a historic mistake and further isolates the United States from the rest of the world,” said Adams. “Bullying other nations to block a UN resolution aimed at saving lives, cultures, and entire countries from climate destruction is just another attempt to protect polluters from the consequences of their actions and to ensure that fossil fuel interests continue to profit without legal constraint.”