Supreme Court Hears Climate Damage Suits Against Oil Firms

Cities and states face mounting costs from floods, wildfires and heat waves tied to climate change. The question before the Supreme Court is whether they can recover some of those costs by suing fossil fuel companies in state court.

The case that opened the new term pits Boulder, Colorado, against Suncor Energy and Exxon Mobil. Boulder contends the companies violated state law by producing and promoting fuels they knew would drive climate harms, and it seeks to shift part of the resulting local expenses onto the firms. The companies and the Trump administration counter that federal environmental statutes and constitutional limits bar such state-court actions, arguing the disputes belong in federal court.

A ruling for the companies could end dozens of similar suits now pending in lower courts. A ruling for Boulder could allow those cases to proceed and expose the industry to substantial liability. Justice Samuel Alito Jr. recused himself after reporting ownership of stock in ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66 and after taking a fishing trip with an investor tied to the dispute; the remaining eight justices will hear the argument.

The same docket includes immigration detention rules, third-country deportations, religious land-use claims, military benefits in divorce cases, and later-term questions on assault-weapon bans and voter-citizenship proof. Nine of eleven federal appeals courts have already rejected the administration’s position on mandatory detention for certain noncitizens. The climate argument is the first of these matters to reach oral argument.