Climate-related displacement is a topic of increasing concern in both academic research and the political, social, and humanitarian spheres. As many seek to develop legal regimes that will allow those living in the most climate-affected areas to move with dignity, individuals and communities living in these countries, regions, and localities are often resistant to the idea of migration as their best adaptation option, and instead call for policy choices that will allow them to stay in place. In this article we seek to legally situate these calls for a right to stay and examine the specific forms that they are taking on the ground. We suggest that there is a typology of right to stay claims, ranging from classic claims—primarily against local government or private actors, against takings or for protection from forced eviction or relocation—to more expansive claims for revised economic, social, or environmental policies to address the underlying drivers of displacement, which may also involve national government and even the international community. We argue that the full range of these different types of claims have relevance in the climate change context, and that such claims may have important legal, moral, and discursive power in efforts to meaningfully address climate change-related displacement in a manner consistent with the rights of those most affected.