A federal appeals court has dismissed a lawsuit brought by nearly two dozen young people aimed at forcing the federal government to take bolder action on climate change, saying the courts were not the appropriate place to address the issue.

A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Friday the young plaintiffs had “made a compelling case that action is needed,” but they did not have legal standing to bring the case.

The lawsuit, Juliana v. United States, was filed in 2015 on behalf of a group of children and teenagers who said the U.S. government continued to use and promote the use of fossil fuels, knowing that such consumption would destabilize the climate, putting future generations at risk.

By doing so, the plaintiffs argued, the U.S. government had violated their constitutional rights to life, liberty and property.

Judge Andrew D. Hurwitz agreed with some of that assertion, writing in a 32-page opinion that “the federal government has long promoted fossil fuel use despite knowing that it can cause catastrophic climate change.”

But, he continued, it was unclear if the court could compel the federal government to phase out fossil fuel emissions and draw down excess greenhouse gas emissions as the plaintiffs requested.

“Reluctantly, we conclude that such relief is beyond our constitutional power,” Hurwitz wrote. “Rather, the plaintiffs’ impressive case for redress must be presented to the political branches of government.”

The decision reversed an earlier ruling by a district court judge that would have allowed the case to move forward.

Philip Gregory, who served as co-counsel for the plaintiffs, strongly disagreed with the 2-1 ruling, saying in an interview with NPR that they would seek an “en banc petition,” which would put the issue before the full 9th Circuit for review.

Gregory, who spoke to some of the young plaintiffs following the decisions, says they were hopeful that their pending petition will be considered, “because as we all know, this Congress and this president will do nothing to ameliorate the climate crisis.”

Both the Trump and Obama administrations opposed the lawsuit. All three of the judges involved in Friday’s ruling were appointed under Obama.

Hurwitz and Judge Mary Murguia made up the majority but the third, Judge Josephine L. Staton, wrote a blistering dissent.

“In these proceedings, the government accepts as fact that the United States has reached a tipping point crying out for a concerted response — yet presses ahead toward calamity,” she wrote. “It is as if an asteroid were barreling toward Earth and the government decided to shut down our only defenses.”

When President Trump’s defense team delivers its opening statement in the Senate impeachment trial next week, famed defense attorney Alan Dershowitz will have a starring role.

But in an interview with NPR’s Mary Louise Kelly on Friday, he sought to make clear that his involvement is limited to arguing that the two articles of impeachment do not satisfy the constitutional criteria for removing the president from office.

“I will not be involved in arguing the facts, nor will I be part of the defense team in the sense of strategy on the facts. My role is limited. I am doing precisely the same thing I would be doing had Hillary Clinton — who I voted for — been elected president and had the Republicans try to impeach her,” Dershowitz told All Things Considered.

He joins Ken Starr, Robert Ray, Jane Raskin and Pam Bondi on a team led by his private attorney Jay Sekulow and White House counsel Pat Cipollone.

Dershowitz, who consulted with former President Bill Clinton’s defense during his impeachment trial, said he would not weigh in on the issue of whether witnesses should be allowed in the Senate trial — an issue being pushed by Democrats and so far resisted by Republicans.

Dershowitz often defends Trump on television, and wrote a book in 2018 called The Case Against Impeaching Trump. He described himself as a liberal Democrat who doesn’t agree with Trump’s policies on immigration, health care, abortion and other issues.

“But I have never allowed partisanship or politics or my own personal views to intrude into principled decisions about what I will represent, who I will represent, what constitutional arguments I would make,” he said.

One of his clients was convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who authorities say killed himself in prison last year where he was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. One of Epstein’s accusers has alleged she was forced to have sex with Dershowitz when she was underage — a charge that Dershowitz has denied. He and his accuser are suing each other for defamation.

Dershowitz said he flagged the issue to Trump and his defense team, who said “that it wouldn’t influence the decision and that they’re fully aware of the false accusations against me and they’re fully aware of the role I played.”

“As Jeffrey Epstein’s lawyer and as O.J. Simpson’s lawyer and as the lawyer for 250 people over a long, long, long career … nobody who’s an experienced lawyer comes on a blank slate,” he said.

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, led Friday prayers in Tehran for the first time in eight years and delivered a sermon in which he excoriated U.S. leaders as “clowns” and accused European countries of negotiating in bad faith over the foundering nuclear deal.

Khamenei also indicated that Iran might retaliate further for the U.S. drone strike that killed top Iranian commander Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, saying a missile attack on U.S. assets in Iraq had been a blow to America’s dignity and its status as a superpower.

The address comes at a delicate time for the ayatollah. Iran’s leaders are locked in a contentious dispute with the U.S., and they’re facing public criticism at home after admitting that Iran accidentally shot down a Ukrainian passenger jet, killing 176 people, most of whom were Iranian.

“The past two weeks were eventful and exceptional weeks,” Khamenei said, according to a partial transcript on his website. Speaking to a large crowd of worshippers in Tehran, he added, “There were bitter and sweet events for the Iranian nation to take lessons from during these two weeks.”

Taking aim at recent statements by President Trump and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo in which they pledged their support for Iran’s regular citizens, Khamenei said, “These American clowns lie in utter viciousness that they stand with the Iranian people.”

Khamenei added, “They lie. If you are standing by the Iranian [people], it is only to stab them in the heart with your venomous daggers.”

Despite the ayatollah’s colorful language, as NPR’s Jane Arraf reports, his overall speech was “perhaps a little bit less fiery than many would have expected.” While the Iranian leader did criticize the U.S. and its allies, she adds, “He did not make specific threats.”

The address comes nearly two weeks after Khamenei openly wept during funeral prayers for Soleimani. The targeted killing galvanized public outrage against the U.S. in Iran and led to the retaliatory strike on U.S. personnel by Tehran – but sentiments in Iran took another turn, after its military initially denied and then admitted to shooting down Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752. Angry public protests followed, including reports of live ammunition being used against demonstrators. It was against that backdrop that the plan for Friday’s speech was announced.

In his sermon, the ayatollah also addressed a recent maneuver that could lead to the reinstatement of U.N. sanctions on Iran: the complaint filed Tuesday by foreign ministers of the U.K., France and Germany. Their formal accusation that Iran violated its commitments under the 2015 nuclear deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, triggers a dispute resolution process — and if that fails, U.N. sanctions on Iran, including an arms embargo, will likely return.

“The threat of the French and German governments and the vicious British government to send Iran’s case to the Security Council proved once again that they are the footmen of the U.S.,” Khamenei said.

After the European nations filed the complaint, Germany’s defense minister said the Trump administration had threatened to punish them if they did not do so, confirming a Washington Post report of a U.S. plan to impose 25% tariffs on European cars if its allies didn’t act.

“This expression or threat, as you will, does exist,” Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer said in response to a question about that report, according to Deutsche Welle.

When they filed the complaint, the ministers sought to distance themselves from the Trump administration’s Iran strategy, issuing a statement saying, “Our three countries are not joining a campaign to implement maximum pressure against Iran.”

Russia and China, two other signatories to the nuclear deal, did not join the French, British and German complaint.

Khamenei accused the European countries of having a deep history of acting in bad faith in the Middle East, and against Iran in particular.

“These three countries are the ones who helped Saddam [Hussein] as much as they could in his war against us,” he said, referring to the Iraq-Iran war of the 1980s.

“The German [government] provided Saddam with chemical weapons to target our cities and frontlines, and its effects are still with us. The French [government] provided Saddam with Super Étendards [helicopters] to attack our oil ships. The British [government] served Saddam in every way, too. This is how they are.”

Khamenei told his audience at Friday prayers, “The same people who appear at the negotiating table — the same so-called ‘gentlemen’ behind the table — are the same terrorists of the Baghdad airport. They just change clothes.”

News organizations and journalists’ advocates are battling restrictive new ground rules for reporters assigned to cover the Senate impeachment trial.

Correspondents who submit to an official credentialing process are granted broad access throughout the Capitol complex and usually encounter few restrictions in talking with members of Congress or others.

But now Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Michael Stenger has imposed new requirements for the impeachment trial, negotiated in part with Republican leadership:

Reporters are being confined to small cordoned-off sections of areas where unrestricted access was typically standard. They are being prevented from walking with senators to continue conversations — even when the senator involved is willingly participating.

Reporters also now may not approach senators for interviews in the halls surrounding the Senate chamber.

Taken together, the new rules effectively prevent members of the press from reaching many senators.

The Capitol is one of the rare places in official Washington where journalists get direct access to newsmakers — in this case, elected officials and their staff members.

Elsewhere, as in the White House or the State Department, for example, reporters’ movements are controlled more closely and access to principals can be severely limited.

The Senate’s new security measures are unusually strict, and more restrictive even than the security protocols generally put in place for the annual State of the Union address — which is attended by the president, many members of the Cabinet and Supreme Court.

Stenger and the Capitol Police may fear that the additional attention drawn to the Senate impeachment trial may increase risks to members of Congress. But members of the press corps are vetted through a longstanding system and pass through security checks every time they enter the Capitol complex.

Nearly 60 news organizations including NPR signed a letter organized by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press on Thursday urging Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to relax the new restrictions on reporters.

“Absent an articulable security rationale, Senate leaders, the Senate sergeant at arms, and the United States Capitol Police have an obligation to preserve and promote the public’s right to know,” the letter said. “Reporters must have the ability to respond quickly to rapid developments and need reasonable access to lawmakers who wish to speak to the press.”

Patricia Gallagher Newberry, president of the Society of Professional Journalists, faulted the new Senate restrictions because they deny reporters the ability to fully cover a once-in-a-generation spectacle.

“To deny journalists their constitutional right to document the historical events occurring now is a gross injustice to the American people,” she said.

“The press is charged with holding the government accountable. It is through its access that the public is informed. When the public is informed, it can make better decisions. The American public should also be outraged about these restrictions.”

Angela Greiling Keane, president of the National Press Club Journalism Institute, warned that the prospect of these continued restrictions could chill reporters’ ability to cover big events or even normal business in the Capitol in the future.

“These restrictions set a horrible precedent and reinforce the lie that the news media is dangerous and the ‘enemy of the people,’ ” Keane said. “Congress should be the most accessible institution in government. As the branch closest to the people, it is ironic that these limits only isolate those who are elected to serve.”

News organizations that assign correspondents to the Capitol — including NPR — are continuing to negotiate ground rules with Stenger, the sergeant-at-arms, and the Capitol Police.