On February 6, 2025, a coalition of twenty-two states issued a lawsuit against the state of New York due to its “Climate Superfund” law, which would require a small group of energy companies to pay retroactively for the costs of alleged damage due to climate change. [emphasis, links added]
The defendants named in this lawsuit are New York Attorney General Letitia James and two other New York state officials. The suit was filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of New York, Albany Division.
Led by West Virginia Attorney General JB McCuskey, the lawsuit contends that the Climate Change Superfund Act is unconstitutional.
Joining McCuskey in the lawsuit are attorneys general from nearly two dozen states: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming.
Other plaintiffs in the lawsuit are three coal trade groups and Alpha Metallurgical Resources, a large coal mining company.
The Climate Change Superfund Act would charge fossil fuel companies seventy-five billion dollars for “climate change damage”.
Mr. McCuskey explained that the suit was filed to ensure that “these misguided policies, being forced from one state onto the entire nation, will not lead America into the doldrums of an energy crisis, allowing China, India, and Russia to overtake our energy independence.”
The attorneys general of these states believe that the Climate Change Superfund Act is politically motivated “overreach”.
The State of New York believes it can seize control over the makeup of America’s energy industry…
They accused the state of New York of trying to force producers and consumers of energy in other states “to subsidize certain New York-based ‘infrastructure’ projects, such as a new sewer system in New York City.”
“If we allow New York to get away with this, it will only be a matter of time before other states follow suit – wrecking our nation’s power grid.”
They argued that these energy producers fully complied with federal law and “could not have reasonably expected that they would be punished for their lawful behavior.”
Further, these attorneys general contend that these energy companies had acted under the federal Clean Air Act. Forcing them to now pay the billions of dollars specified in this law could offer them no choice but to go out of business, and that would also result in massive job losses.
“The State of New York believes it can seize control over the makeup of America’s energy industry,” the lawsuit states.
“In an unprecedented effort, New York has set out to impose tens of billions of dollars of liability on traditional energy producers disfavored by certain New York politicians.”
They contend that this could also lead to an energy crisis.
The lawsuit states that fossil fuels “helped keep the lights on in Albany, manufacture the steel that supported New York City’s iconic skyscrapers, and fuel the industry that keeps New York ports humming.”
On the other side of the coin, the state of New York claims that it will likely have to spend “several hundred billion dollars” through 2050 on climate adaptation investments.
Experts describe New York City’s current sewage system as “archaic” and not fit to cope with increasing climate-related storm surges and extreme rainfall.
Last September, state highways and one of the subway lines flooded when the remnants of storm Ophelia descended on New York City.
Of course, climate change is being blamed for this despite statistics showing definitively that storms are not getting worse.
The Climate Change Superfund Act states:
“Based on decades of research it is now possible to determine with great accuracy the share of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere by specific fossil fuel companies over the last 70 years or more, making it possible to assign liability to and require compensation from companies commensurate with their emissions during a given time period.”
A spokesperson for New York Governor Hochul told Reuters that the governor “believes corporate polluters should pay for the wreckage caused by the climate crisis—not everyday New Yorkers. … We look forward to defending this landmark legislation in court,” the spokesperson added.
On July 18, 2019, the state of New York passed a law known as the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act.
This law requires New York to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by the year 2030 and 85% by the year 2050.
In addition, New York City passed the Climate Mobilization Act, which set goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve energy efficiency for some of the buildings in New York City.
This issue will undoubtedly end up in the US Supreme Court because it was alleged to be unconstitutional. Further, it has never been proved that hydrocarbon emissions have caused the Earth’s temperature to rise.
This needs to be discussed in any future litigation. Perhaps that matter should be settled before any other such laws are passed.
Hundreds of fascinating facts about the climate change scam can be found in Lynne Balzer’s richly illustrated book, Exposing the Great Climate Change Lie, available on Amazon.
Might I suggest for Ms A.G. of N.Y. the Humble Pie is gose good with the Crow
A thought Lynne:
All combustion (fire) creates water vapour. Heat trapping greenhouse gases. CO2 @ 400ppm. Water vapour (clouds) @ 3 to 5,000ppm. I guess we’re going to have to ban fire and go back to the Stone Ages.
Toodle Pips
All right AGNY lets see you try on the slippers and their too small
Notice that not a single state run by Democrats joined in this lawsuit. Not surprising though even though such a law would negatively impact citizens in every state, including the blue states.