Fox’s first appearance — A group of nearly two dozen Republican attorneys general is asking the Supreme Court to intervene in Hawaii’s climate change liability case, saying it could have a “significant” impact on U.S. energy production.
In February, a coalition of major oil companies asked the Supreme Court to consider a lawsuit by the City of Honolulu that accused the company of misleading the public about its role in contributing to global warming, resulting in could result in billions of dollars in damages.
Twenty states, led by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, filed the case in the high court on Monday, arguing that this lawsuit and several other similar cases that have percolated through lower courts are “insults to equal sovereignty.” filed a court brief requesting reconsideration. This is an attempt by a state to use its own laws to impose its energy policy on the entire nation.
“The serious threat these cases pose to equal sovereignty and our nation’s energy infrastructure is sufficient reason for this court to grant review,” the filing states.
Consumer groups reveal left-wing groups are increasingly using courts to push for a Green New Deal
Twenty state attorneys general have asked the Supreme Court to take up a lawsuit to hold big oil companies accountable for climate change. (AP Photo/Jacqueline Martin)
In 2020, the City of Honolulu sued several major fossil fuel companies, including Exxon and Chevron, claiming their products were contributing to greenhouse gas emissions and global warming without warning consumers of the risks.
The city has enacted a series of state laws, including public nuisance and trespass controls, and companies have given the state billions of dollars to help mitigate the effects of climate change, including weather events, sea level rise, heat waves, flooding, and global warming in general. He insisted that he should pay.
The energy companies appealed to the Hawaii Supreme Court, arguing that federal law prevents states from effectively setting state-wide energy policy, but the court disagreed.
“The time for the courts to intervene is now,” the AGs wrote in a brief, adding that “it is not within the constitutional authority of the state to curtail the sale and use of traditional energy everywhere.” Ta.
Alabama AG Steve Marshall (Getty/File)
They argue that the case presents a “unique opportunity” because Hawaii courts have allowed an unusual appellate option and withheld discovery for most of the case while the parties go through the appeals process. .
“Before state courts issue preliminary relief that could create a national emergency or create a patchwork of new taxes on the nation’s energy system that would make life difficult for all Americans. The court should act,” the AGs wrote.
In an interview with Fox News Digital, Marshall said the lawsuit is “an effort by environmentalists to control energy policy in this country.”
“They’re trying to do it through a friendly forum, in this case Hawaii’s state courts. And the people of Alabama are hoping that Hawaii state court judges will ultimately decide how we treat the fossil fuel industry here. “This country is absolutely against deciding,” he said.
Climate lawsuit coordinated by Billionaire-fueled Rockefeller Fund with DEM state government: internal documents
“What we are seeing here is a damages judgment being used to either change the behavior of fossil fuel companies or dramatically increase the cost of energy for the American people,” said Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall. It means that there is.” (Adobe Stock)
“What we’re seeing here is a damages judgment being used to either change the behavior of fossil fuel companies or dramatically increase the cost of energy for the American people,” Marshall said. said.
Citing the United States’ rich sovereign precedent, the attorneys general argued that federal common law already provides that disputes over cross-border pollution should be decided by federal courts, not states. ing.
They also cite the Clean Air Act, arguing that despite federal intervention, it still gives states certain powers to regulate emissions.
The Clean Air Act recognizes that it is the state’s “primary responsibility” to prevent and control air pollution “at its source.”
“This statutory system embodies cooperative federalism, allowing each state to implement its own regulations consistent with federal standards,” the AGs wrote in a prepared statement.
“As a result, our federal system allows states to pursue different policies regarding energy production and environmental protection.”
“You don’t want to allow states like Hawaii and California to dictate energy policy for the entire country. But they are using the threat of large-scale jury verdicts to try to bankrupt the fossil fuel industry. ,” Marshall told FOX News Digital. .
“And that’s not good for the people of Alabama. It’s not good for providing affordable energy and accessible energy for the people of this country,” he said.
Law firm fueled by dark money joins Massachusetts climate change lawsuit against Big Oil
This photo shows a crude oil pump jack in the Permian Basin in Loving County, Texas, on November 22, 2019. (Reuters/Angus Mordaunt)
“Although this case is being fought in Hawaii, which is far away from us in Alabama, it is very important for us to be involved. “It’s also very important for the courts,” he said. .
“The doctrine used against energy companies can be extended to target any cross-border activities that allegedly ‘degrade the environment,'” the AGs wrote in their brief. said.[s] This is the effect of climate change. ”
One example they point to happened just a few weeks ago, when New York state sued “the world’s largest producer of beef products for misleading the public about their environmental impact.”
The beef producer’s stated commitment to achieve “net zero by 2040” means that rather than “reducing production and demand” for beef, the company “plans to increase global demand for its products.” It is said to be misleading because it is The company’s “greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere and…supply chain practices” were said to be “contributing.”[e] to the harm of climate change. ”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“The New York State complaint alleges that “the world’s top five meat and dairy companies combined produce more greenhouse gas emissions annually than ExxonMobil, Shell, and BP individually.” Indeed, in the view of some states, these companies (and countless others) are also “exacerbating the effects of climate change,” the AG’s brief states.
“But when states entered the Union, they waived their right to apply their own laws to these types of interstate disputes. “A retrial should be granted.”
The City of Honolulu will submit its response on May 1st, with a final written statement expected on May 15th. A decision on whether the Supreme Court will reconsider the case could come in June.
Fox News Digital has reached out to the City and County of Honolulu for a response to the court brief.
