The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a lawsuit blocking Democratic-led states from suing big oil companies for misleading the public about the impact of fossil fuels and emissions on climate change.
The attorneys general of Democratic-led states California, Connecticut, Minnesota, and Rhode Island brought the lawsuit. They are seeking damages from oil and energy companies such as Exxon Mobil, Sunoco, Shell, and Chevron. The states claim the companies intentionally misled the public about the harmful effects of greenhouse gas emissions on climate change caused by their fossil-fuel products. They are seeking billions of dollars in damages from the climate change effects causing devastating wildfires, storms, and rising sea levels. Other states have brought lawsuits against oil and gas companies as well.
Nineteen Republican-led states filed a lawsuit asking the Supreme Court to prevent the states from suing energy companies. They claim the lawsuits go beyond suing for the harms caused in their state and seek to regulate federal laws regarding emissions. Not only are the states prohibited from interfering with federal emission laws, but they also argue that doing so would drive up energy costs. The Republican-led states went to the Supreme Court because SCOTUS has “original” jurisdiction over state conflicts.
The Supreme Court Has Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court is the “highest court in the land” and hears appellate cases from lower courts. Lawsuits that start in state courts can be appealed to federal courts.
It also has direct jurisdiction over state disputes. Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution grants the Supreme Court “original jurisdiction” for cases between states and cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls.
The Supreme Court Can Decline Cases
Although the Supreme Court has jurisdiction, they also have the discretion to reject to rule on cases submitted to them.
The Supreme Court decided not to hear the case. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Justice Thomas wrote that the ability of the Supreme Court to decline to hear disputes among the states is "suspect, at best," although it is fairly routine. This is not the first time the Supreme Court has declined to hear appeals over lawsuits against energy companies. On January 13, 2025, the Supreme Court refused to hear a climate change lawsuit brought by Honolulu after the Hawaii Supreme Court allowed its case to proceed.
The Effect of the Decision
This decision allows states to continue their lawsuits against energy companies. Energy companies generally want their lawsuits heard in federal court because they tend to have more favorable outcomes for energy companies than state courts.
Over the last half-decade, there has been a flurry of legal action taken regarding climate change and CO2 emissions. This Supreme Court decision may be unpopular with the Trump administration. During his campaign, Trump revealed his energy policy of stopping “frivolous” environmental activist litigation, reverse energy efficiency measures, and promote the building of new fossil-fuel companies.
Related Resources
- Will U.S. Courts Begin Weighing In on Climate Change? (FindLaw Courtside)
- The U.S. Supreme Court - Overview (FindLaw Learn About The Law - Litigation and Appeals)
- Climate Change and the Law (FindLaw Learn About The Law)
