The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) on Monday refused to hear the appeals of multiple oil companies which alleged that a negligence lawsuit against them violates the US Constitution’s separation of powers and federal common law.
The two lawsuits, one led by Sunoco and one led by Shell, assert that the Supreme Court of Hawaii overstepped the separation of powers enshrined in the constitution by violating the state-law pre-emption clause in the Clean Air Act and the precedent set by the City of New York v. Chevron Corp — which found that state tort law is inapplicable as a tool to govern greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse emissions, they argue, are international and generally lack clear individuals who can be held responsible, making them fall under federal government authority. Moreover, established federal and international regulations are already in place to govern emissions, and tort claims, per International Paper co v. Oullette, can only be brought in the origin state for the emissions.
The respondents counter-argued that their suit does not seek to hold the respondents liable for tort damage only because of releasing greenhouse gas emissions, but rather for running a misinformation campaign, failure to warn, and failure to disclose the potential environmental harms of greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, it would be distinguishable from both New York and Ouellette because the behavior being brought to suit is not the releasing of emissions in itself, which do fall under federal jurisdiction, but the negligence involved in failing to disclose or actively trying to hide, the risks from the general public and regional governments. This would also mean that the suits are not contravening the authority of international treatises or federal regulations governing emissions or other environmental standards.
The suit follows a Hawaii Supreme Court decision holding that the application of state tort law is permissible against greenhouse gas emitters. The court found that the suit was not pre-empted by federal environmental legislation and that the test for jurisdiction was satisfied as the case was a tort rather than a regulatory matter. The suit was launched by the Hawaiian city of Honolulu and joined by multiple municipalities and regional organizations in response to what they argue was an effort by large oil companies to deceive the general public about the environmental risks of greenhouse gases.
