Environmental advocates have warned that fossil fuel interests are attacking climate accountability litigation and pursuing a strategy that would destroy all future prospects for such cases.
Over 200 advocacy groups have urged Democratic representatives to “proactively and affirmatively” oppose any attempt by the industry to obtain immunity from litigation.
“We have reason to believe that the fossil fuel industry and its allies will use the chaos and overreach of the new Trump administration to attempt yet again to … shield themselves from facing consequences for their decades of pollution and deception,” delivers a letter to Congress.
The letter was signed by 195 environmental groups, such as the Earthjustice and Sunrise Movement, Sierra Club, legal non-profits, including the American Association for Justice and Public Justice, and numerous other organizations.
During the last decade, states and municipalities have filed more than 30 lawsuits blaming Big Oil for concealing the climate risks of its products and pursuing potentially billions in damages. There has been limited success in killing the cases by the defendants.
With Republicans now holding the White House and both chambers of Congress, advocates worry that the industry may seek total immunity from all current and future climate-related lawsuits. To achieve this, they might push for a liability waiver similar to the one awarded to the firearms industry in 2005, which has effectively prevented most efforts to hold it accountable for violence.
“Lawmakers must decisively reject any attempt by the fossil fuel industry to evade accountability and ensure both justice today and the right of future generations to hold polluters responsible for decades of deception,” wrote the missive, addressed to House minority leader Hakeem Jeffries and Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer.
Fossil fuel firms have competed for such a get-out-of-jail-free card for years. Republican officials, economists, and oil companies proposed legal liability for a carbon tax in 2017, claiming the industry could not weather both. Documents subpoenaed by the Senate show that Exxon threatened to leave the council when the council abandoned the waiver proposal two years later.
Later, a waiver was included in a draft of the COVID-19 spending package in 2020, but it was later removed, Drilled found.
This waiver would only be approved by the Senate with supermajority backing, which would need some Democratic support. In a January interview, Michael Gerrard, a climate law expert from Columbia University, stated that it is “hard to envision” achieving bipartisan support. Advocates are concerned that oil companies might persuade officials to once again subtly include the proposal in a larger, essential piece of legislation.
During his campaign, Trump vowed to “put an end to frivolous lawsuits from environmental extremists.” Recently, a rightwing think tank initiated a campaign aimed at combating lawsuits from “radical climate groups,” labeling it the “greatest threat” to Donald Trump’s energy policy, according to E&E News. This think tank is associated with Leonard Leo, recognized as a key figure in the Federalist Society, which has played a significant role in the ultraconservative transformation of the American judiciary.
Last year, groups associated with Leo initiated another campaign described by one expert as “unprecedented” to persuade the supreme court to protect oil companies from lawsuits. This week and in January, the high court rejected their request. On Monday, a truck parked outside a significant fossil fuel conference in Houston cautioned that “lawfare and anti-energy laws are threatening America’s pro-consumer energy dominance,” referring to an op-ed from a group connected to Leo.
Oil companies are also concerned about another development: “climate superfund” bills pointed to making big polluters pay for climate action. Oil lobby groups and red states are challenging
the laws.
