The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to hear a case brought by oil companies facing a lawsuit in Colorado that seeks compensation for damages allegedly caused by climate change. [some emphasis, links added]
In 2018, the city and county of Boulder filed a lawsuit seeking damages from weather events, which they allege are caused by burning fossil fuels. They also accuse the oil companies of deceiving the public about the dangers of climate change.
The companies had sought to have the case dismissed in state court, but the Colorado Supreme Court allowed the case to proceed in Colorado courts. The companies are asking the Supreme Court to overturn that decision.
Boulder’s lawsuit is but one of dozens of climate lawsuits that are part of a climate advocacy campaign, which many experts argue is aimed at enacting climate policy through the court system [to circumvent] legislatures, which are reluctant to ban fossil fuels.
The well-funded effort extends beyond the courts into judicial trainingon the science of climate change, the media, and scientific research.
The Boulder case is being closely watched, and it’s not just the oil and gas industry. If successful, the settlements would cost oil companies billions of dollars, which would then be passed on to consumers.
And it wouldn’t stop there. The theories put forth by the plaintiffs could easily apply to any industry with significant greenhouse gas emissions, including utilities and manufacturers.
“Supreme Court review will bring much-needed clarity and uniformity to this issue and help ensure that fundamental policy decisions about energy and climate are made by the appropriate branches of government. We look forward to the Court’s consideration of these critical questions,” Phil Goldberg, special counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, said in a statement.
Change In Administration
In their petition to the Supreme Court, Sunoco Energy Inc. and ExxonMobil Corporation argue that the Constitution doesn’t allow for government entities to sue under state laws regarding public nuisance and consumer fraud for injuries alleged to have been caused by pollution coming from sources outside the state.
Greenhouse gases do not stop at state lines.
The Clean Air Act, they argue, preempts state law, and they’re asking the Supreme Court to clarify if state law can be used to seek damages from the global issue of climate change.
Last year, the high court had declined to grant certiorari, as it’s called, in another climate lawsuit, but that was before the election of President Donald Trump.
In 2020, Honolulu filed its own climate lawsuit against Sunoco, Exxon, and other energy companies, arguing the same points in the Boulder suit.
In 2023, the Supreme Court of Hawaii rejected the oil companies’ request to dismiss the suit, and the defendants asked the high court to review the decision.
In the summer of 2024, the Supreme Court asked the Biden administration’s Justice Department to weigh in on the matter.
Then-Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar submitted briefs the following December, arguing that the justices should reject the appeal from energy companies and allow the cases to play out in state courts before the high court reviews them, which the high court ultimately decided to do.
Read rest at Just The News
