SCOTUS will consider whether cities, states can sue oil firms over climate-change damage

Jason Franson/Bloomberg

The nation's top court has agreed to consider a long-simmering question about whether state and local governments can sue oil and gas companies over alleged climate-related damages in state court.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week added to its docket Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder, which raises the question of "whether federal law precludes state-law claims seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate." They also asked parties to consider whether the court has the power to hear the case at all.

The city and county of Boulder, Colo. in 2018 sued Exxon Mobil and Canadian-based Suncor Energy, arguing the companies knowingly contributed to global climate change and causing millions of dollars of local damage. The Colorado Supreme Court last May ruled that the lawsuit could proceed. In response, the energy companies in August asked SCOTUS to take the case, saying the case "provides the court with its best opportunity yet to resolve one of the most important questions currently pending in the lower courts."

Energy companies "are facing numerous lawsuits in state courts across the nation seeking billions of dollars in damages for injuries allegedly caused by the contribution of greenhouse-gas emissions to global climate change," they said in their petition.

"Our case is, fundamentally, about fairness," said Boulder Climate Initiatives Director Jonathan Koehn in a statement. "Boulder is already experiencing the effects of a rapidly warming climate, and the financial burden of adaptation should not fall solely on local taxpayers. We are hopeful that the Supreme Court will not hamstring our right under Colorado law."

Eleven U.S. states, the District of Columbia, as well as "dozens" of local governments have active lawsuits against energy companies for misleading the public about the impacts of their products on climate change, according to the Center for Climate Integrity. None have gone to trial.

The governments argue that oil companies should help cover the costs of climate damage like wildfires, rising sea levels and severe storms.

Energy companies have repeatedly asked to move the cases to federal court where they expect to fare better. They have also filed their own countersuits, including in a case that cited San Francisco bond documents to bolster their case. President Donald Trump in April signed an executive order seeking to protect oil companies from state and local lawsuits. In May, the Department of Justice sued Hawaii and Michigan to stop the states from filing climate change-related lawsuits, arguing it interferes with federal energy policy.

The Supreme Court has denied five previous requests from energy firms to take up cases against the companies since 2023.

The Trump administration filed an amicus brief supporting the oil companies and asking SCOTUS to take up what it called an issue "of vast nationwide significance."

"If, as the Colorado Supreme Court held, those theories are consistent with federal law, then every locality in the country could sue essentially anyone in the world for contributing to global climate change," the federal government said.

A group of 26 states filed their own amicus brief that argued Boulder's lawsuit threatens their supply of affordable energy and sovereignty.

"To be sure, states can assign liability for conduct outside their borders in some contexts," the states argued. "But the theory that every state can regulate every molecule that enters the atmosphere anywhere in the world is unlimited. When one state's power grows so far beyond its proper sphere, the rights of every other state wither."

The court is expected to hear the case in the fall.