Supreme Court Weighs Oil Companies’ Bid to Block Boulder Climate Lawsuit
publishers 23articles 31first reported 2 Oct, 13:56 UTCdeveloping since 2 Oct · 14 editions
The U.S. Supreme Court heard nearly two hours of arguments Monday over whether a Colorado climate lawsuit against Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy may proceed under state law.
Boulder’s city and county governments sued the companies in 2018, alleging they helped drive climate change, misled the public about the risks of fossil fuels and should pay for past and future costs including infrastructure repairs, environmental damage, emergency management and public-health harms. The Colorado Supreme Court previously allowed the case to move forward.
Exxon and Suncor argued that claims involving interstate and global air pollution are governed by federal law and cannot be pursued under state law. The Trump administration supported the companies, contending that Congress did not authorize Boulder’s suit through the Clean Air Act.
Several justices questioned whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review the Colorado ruling at this stage. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson called the review “premature,” while Chief Justice John Roberts pressed the companies and the administration to explain why Boulder’s claims should be barred when state lawsuits have been permitted in similar contexts. Justice Brett Kavanaugh emphasized earlier Supreme Court decisions treating interstate pollution as a matter of federal law.
Justice Samuel Alito recused himself, leaving eight justices to decide the case. A 4-4 split would leave the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision intact and permit Boulder’s lawsuit to continue in state court.
HOW THIS STORY WAS MADE
Written from 8 articles, 3 with the publisher's own text; 8 independent newsrooms once syndicated copies count as one; this version written 72 h after the record first saw the story; the editor kept it as written.
- Publishers
- 23
- Source articles
- 31
- Given to the writer
- 8, 3 with the article's own text
- Independent newsrooms
- 8
- This version written
- 72 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 →