In the News Archives - Climate Litigation Watch

Supremely Good Timing

You likely have heard that the Supreme Court reached the right decision today in BP plc et al. v. City of Baltimore. That opinion concerns a mildly weedy procedural mater (whether the 4th Cir. erred in holding that it lacked the power to consider all of the defendants’ grounds for removal), but a critical one given the circumstances, and an opinion which should help in removing these cases […]

Amicus Filer EPA’s Comment on SCOTUS Opinion in Mayor & City of Baltimore Climate Nuisance Case

Energy Policy Advocates issued the following statement to CLW: The Supreme Court’s opinion this morning in Mayor and City of Baltimore v. BP plc et al., serves as another reminder of the importance of the state vs federal jurisdictional issue in the wave of “climate” litigation washing over state courthouses around the country. All of these […]

Climate Litigation Confessional: Yes, it Really IS About Finding “New Streams of Revenue”

CLW readers may recall our recent curiosity about an email, and its attachment, which went missing from a document production from the Oregon Department of Justice. This particular email had begun a thread, one which showed the origin of Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum’s participation in yet another Center for Climate Integrity panel discussing (as one academic infamously put […]

2nd Circuit Affirms Climate Case Dismissal

From Energy in Depth: “The climate litigation campaign was dealt yet another stinging defeat in New York on Thursday after a federal appeals court rejected New York City’s attempt to revive its climate lawsuit against energy companies. It’s the second major loss in the state for climate liability supporters in less than 18 months after the New […]

Washington Times: Despite denials, count on Biden-Harris to direct AG to do their scandalous bidding

With potentially bruising Department of Justice confirmation battles looming, both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris now vigorously deny that they would ever direct their Attorney General to do their political bidding or target specific opponents. This would be unremarkable, had they not promised the opposite with equal vigor – and disturbing specificity – during the […]