Supreme Court declines to hear states’ climate lawsuit

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear a lawsuit filed by 19 Republican-led states, aiming to halt climate change litigation initiated by five Democratic-led states against major oil companies.

Claims against Big Oil: The decision permits the continuation of lawsuits that accuse the oil companies of misleading the public regarding the environmental hazards associated with fossil fuels. The Republican attorneys general, spearheaded by Alabama’s Steve Marshall, contended that the climate lawsuits posed “grave consequences” for their residents and could escalate energy costs nationwide.

Dissenting views: The justices’ determination is a setback for the oil and gas sector and its Republican allies, who have consistently sought to obstruct litigation that could hold companies financially accountable for climate change impacts. Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, dissented, expressing that the Republican-led states raised “serious constitutional violations” and should have been granted the opportunity to present their case. ​

Suing for damages: The lawsuits from the Democratic-led states—California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Rhode Island—allege that major energy companies, such as Exxon Mobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Shell, and BP, engaged in deceptive practices by concealing the detrimental effects of fossil fuel consumption on the climate. The states are seeking monetary damages to address the consequences of climate change, including severe storms, wildfires, and rising sea levels. ​

SCOTUS’s hands-off stance: This decision by the Supreme Court aligns with its previous refusals to intervene in similar cases. In January, the Court declined to hear an appeal by Sunoco and other oil companies seeking to dismiss a lawsuit by Honolulu after the Hawaii Supreme Court allowed the climate change case to proceed.