Supreme Court Considers Scope of Climate Change Litigation

Why it matters locally: South Carolina, with its coastal communities and tourism-dependent economy, is vulnerable to the effects of climate change. The Supreme Court's decision on jurisdictional matters could impact the ability of South Carolina cities or the state itself to pursue similar litigation against energy companies for climate change-related damages.

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court began its new term this week by hearing arguments in a case central to climate change litigation. The case involves a lawsuit brought by Boulder County, Colorado, along with the city of Boulder and San Miguel County, against energy companies ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy. The Colorado localities initially filed their lawsuit in state court in 2018. They allege that the companies contributed to climate change effects, such as increased wildfires and beetle infestations, and seek damages for mitigation and adaptation costs. The energy companies subsequently moved to have the case heard in federal court, arguing that the claims involve federal rather than state law. A federal appeals court previously ruled that the case should return to state court. The Supreme Court will now decide whether the lawsuit, which addresses the impact of fossil fuel production on the local environment, belongs in federal or state jurisdiction. This jurisdictional question holds implications for similar lawsuits filed by other cities and states across the country. The outcome could determine the legal avenues available for localities seeking to hold energy companies accountable for climate change-related damages. Legal analysts indicate the Supreme Court's decision on this procedural matter could affect the progression of future climate litigation.