Article II Section 8 of the Constitution of the State of Arizona states, “No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.”

While this section is primarily about the right to privacy and the sanctity of one’s home, it could be interpreted to include environmental disturbances. For instance, if a person’s home or private affairs are being disturbed due to environmental pollution, such as air or water pollution caused by nearby industrial activities, or excessive and repeated heat waves as a result of global climate change, one could argue that this is a violation of their rights under this section.

The interpretation hinges on the definition of “disturbed” and “private affairs.” If a court were to consider health and wellbeing, or the enjoyment of one’s property, as part of one’s “private affairs,” and environmental harm as a form of “disturbance,” then this section could potentially be used to argue for a right to a clean and healthy environment.

Of course, this interpretation would depend on the specific legal context, jurisdiction, and potentially, precedent. It’s also important to note that such an interpretation might require a broad and progressive view of constitutional rights, which most AZ courts are probably unwilling to adopt.

However, it seems clear that, in the absence of new laws, we need to find ways to apply existing laws in novel ways to protect ourselves from the ongoing environmental catastrophe. I’d be interested in exploring this potential further with others of similar mind.