Oil Companies Ask Supreme Court to Block Climate Lawsuits Early

The Supreme Court heard arguments Monday over whether more than two dozen state and local lawsuits accusing oil companies of lying about climate change can move forward, in a case that could decide how much money cities and counties can seek from the industry for storm, drought, and heat damage, according to Ars Technica.

The case before the justices was filed in 2018 by the city and county of Boulder, Colorado, against ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy in state court. Boulder and similar plaintiffs around the country want oil companies to help pay the costs of climate-related extreme weather, in damages that could reach into the billions of dollars, Ars Technica reported.

What is the Supreme Court actually deciding?

The justices are not weighing whether the oil companies lied to the public. Instead, the hearing focused on a narrower legal question: whether federal law blocks states and cities from bringing these claims in the first place. The Boulder case has already survived multiple rounds of appeals in both state and federal courts, but the companies are asking the Supreme Court to shut the door before any trial happens.

What are the oil companies arguing?

Kannon Shanmugam, the lawyer arguing for Exxon and Suncor, told the court that Boulder's lawsuit amounts to an attempt to use state law to control oil company behavior worldwide. "This case represents an unprecedented effort to use state law to regulate global conduct," Shanmugam said, according to Ars Technica.

He warned that letting the case proceed would open the door for thousands of local governments to set national energy policy through jury verdicts. "If Boulder's claims are allowed to go forward, some 90,000 municipalities across the country would have the ability to make national and international energy policy by asking juries to impose catastrophic damages on selected fossil fuel producers," Shanmugam said.

What is Boulder saying in response?

"This case is not about emissions. It's about deception."

That is how Kevin Russell, the attorney representing Boulder, summed up the city's position during arguments, per Ars Technica. Russell and other plaintiffs across the country say they are not trying to limit how much oil or gas companies can produce or sell. The Boulder suit seeks money damages, not a court order stopping any company activity. Lawyers for the plaintiffs argue that distinction matters because federal preemption law is built around blocking states from regulating conduct, not from collecting damages after the fact.

Why did some justices question the timing?

Justice Clarence Thomas raised the first procedural issue of the day, asking whether the Supreme Court even has the authority to step in now, before any trial court has issued a ruling on the merits, Ars Technica reported. The oil companies countered that the growing number of lawsuits is already causing harm and that waiting for a trial verdict before deciding the legal question would be too late. Several justices, according to the Ars Technica account of the hearing, suggested they were skeptical that this was the right moment for the court to intervene.

What else is happening around these lawsuits?

The Supreme Court case is part of a broader push by oil companies and conservative groups to stop climate liability suits before they reach juries. Some states have already passed laws barring these kinds of lawsuits, and Republican lawmakers in Congress have introduced federal legislation that would shield oil companies from climate liability claims, Ars Technica reported. The Trump administration has also stepped into several of the state cases, including Boulder's, to argue they should not move forward.

Separately, scientists whose research is cited in the lawsuits have faced more than 100 public records requests from conservative groups seeking information about their work and who funds it, according to reporting from Politico cited by Ars Technica.

What happens next

A ruling from the Supreme Court is not expected immediately. If the justices side with the oil companies on the preemption question, it could end the Boulder case and similar suits in other cities before they ever reach a jury. If the court rules the question is premature or sides with Boulder, the case would return to the lower courts, keeping alive the possibility of a trial over what the companies knew about climate change and when. Either outcome will shape whether dozens of other pending climate lawsuits filed by states and municipalities across the country get their day in court.

AlterEgo — A keyboard for character voices. Five free persona rewrites a day.