Supreme Court to hear Big Oil bid to block Boulder climate lawsuit
publishers 12articles 13first reported 2 Oct, 13:56 UTCdeveloping since 2 Oct · 14 editions
The U.S. Supreme Court is set to open its new term Monday by hearing Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy’s effort to block a climate-change lawsuit filed by the city and county of Boulder, Colorado.
Boulder’s 2018 lawsuit seeks damages under state law for past and future harms it attributes to fossil-fuel production and allegedly deceptive marketing. Local officials say climate change has forced the area to contend with extreme heat, more frequent and severe wildfires, and ecosystem damage. Exxon and Suncor argue that federal law bars the claims.
The companies unsuccessfully sought to move the case to federal court and later asked a Boulder County court to dismiss it. After that court refused, the Colorado Supreme Court allowed the case to proceed, prompting the companies’ appeal. The U.S. Supreme Court will consider both whether federal law precludes Boulder’s claims and whether the justices have jurisdiction to review the state court’s decision.
A ruling for Boulder would allow the case to continue but would not decide whether the local governments are entitled to damages. The dispute could affect dozens of similar state-court lawsuits filed by governments seeking compensation from oil companies for climate-related costs.
Justice Samuel Alito has recused himself, leaving eight justices to hear the case. The court did not state a reason; his 2025 financial disclosure listed individual holdings in ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66.
Separately, Middlesex County, New Jersey, filed a state lawsuit against several oil companies and the American Petroleum Institute over alleged climate deception and flooding costs. API called that lawsuit baseless and said climate policy belongs in Congress rather than the courts.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 2 with the publisher's own text; 8 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 48 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 12
- Source articles
- 13
- Given to the writer
- 8, 2 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 8
- This version written
- 48 h after the record first saw the story
- Second model (editor)
- kept as written
- Publication gate
- passed
- Human review
- none
WHAT THE EDITOR DID
The second model checked the writer's draft against the same sources and published it as written.
Written by a language model from the sources above, then checked by a second model that may only cut, attribute or correct. How it works →