The US Supreme Court heard arguments Monday on whether state courts can hold ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy liable for climate damages in a case brought by Boulder, Colorado. The ruling, expected by summer 2027, could decide the fate of two dozen similar lawsuits against fossil fuel companies nationwide.
The US Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in a case that could determine whether state courts can hold major polluters liable for the costs of climate change. ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy asked the court to block a compensation case first brought against them in 2018 by the county and city of Boulder, Colorado.
Oil companies argue states overstep their authority
A lawyer for the oil companies, Kannon Shanmugam, told the court the US constitution bars states from intervening in climate change cases. According to the Financial Times: "This case involves an unprecedented effort to use state law to regulate global conduct". He said climate cases against the energy industry keep multiplying, with new suits filed literally by the week.
Boulder's case alleges that Exxon and Suncor knowingly contributed to global warming since the 1960s while obstructing public understanding of the phenomenon. Justice Elena Kagan likened the dispute to a third chapter in litigation that began with tobacco and opioid lawsuits.
Alito's recusal raises the stakes
Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from the case a week before arguments began, after financial disclosures showed he held stock in ConocoPhillips, a company tied to similar claims. His absence raises the chance of a deadlock, which would leave in place a Colorado Supreme Court ruling from last year that allowed Boulder's case to proceed.
A decision is expected by the time the court breaks for summer in 2027. Legal scholar Michael Gerrard of Columbia University said the outcome could shape two dozen similar cases brought by states, counties and cities against fossil fuel companies, including pending claims against Exxon in Massachusetts and against BP in Hawaii.
Conservative legal scholar Jonathan Adler said a clear ruling against Boulder would shut the most promising path for climate litigation, while a win for Boulder could widen the circumstances in which federal law overrides state law.
Source: Financial Times
Trading involves risk.
Risk Disclaimer
