Court Requests Input from Biden Administration in Climate Lawsuits

The Supreme Court has asked for input from the Biden administration in two cases concerning the legal dispute between Honolulu and major oil and gas companies.

In an order issued by the high court, the solicitor general has been requested to submit a brief on the federal government’s stance in two appeals of a Hawaii Supreme Court ruling brought by the energy industry.

Justice Samuel Alito did not participate in the consideration of the cases and did not provide a reason for his recusal. However, CBS News reported that this may be due to his ownership of stock in ConocoPhillips, one of the companies involved in the lawsuits.

Similar to other cases brought against U.S. energy companies by state and local governments, the dispute initiated by Honolulu and litigated in Hawaii state court alleges that the oil and gas industry misled the public about the risks of their products and their environmental impacts.

A coalition of 15 oil and gas firms has urged the Supreme Court to review the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision permitting the Honolulu lawsuit, filed in March 2020, to move forward. The city’s government has made various claims, including creating a public nuisance and failing to warn the public about the dangers of using fossil fuels.

The city asserts that the energy industry has caused property damage and a decrease in tax revenue due to decreased tourism, attributing these effects to global climate change resulting in flooding, erosion, and more frequent and severe weather events.

The companies argue that greenhouse gas emissions stem from choices made over more than a century by governments, companies, and individuals regarding fuel use. Honolulu is seeking compensation for the “cumulative impact of global emissions leading to climate change,” they stated.

The Hawaii Supreme Court ultimately allowed the lawsuit to proceed, ruling that the Clean Air Act supersedes federal common law governing lawsuits seeking damages for interstate pollution. The court also found that the city was challenging the sale and promotion of fossil fuel products rather than seeking to regulate emissions through the lawsuit, as alleged by the oil and gas companies.

“Plaintiffs’ state tort law claims do not aim to regulate emissions, and there is no ‘actual conflict’ between Hawaii tort law and the [Clean Air Act],” the Hawaii Supreme Court determined. “These claims potentially regulate marketing conduct while the CAA regulates pollution.”

The energy companies have appealed to the Supreme Court to halt Honolulu’s lawsuit, contending that the regulation of interstate pollution falls under federal jurisdiction.

“Rarely does a case of such significant importance to one of the nation’s most crucial industries come before this court,” the companies’ lawyers wrote in a court filing. “Energy companies producing, selling, and marketing fossil fuels face numerous lawsuits in state courts nationwide seeking billions of dollars in damages for injuries attributed to global climate change.”