The Climate Docket

WHAT WE COVER:

  • Liability Litigation
    • Baltimore Lawsuit
    • California Climate Lawsuits
    • Colorado Lawsuit
    • Mass. v. Exxon
    • New York City Lawsuit
    • Rhode Island Lawsuit
    • Other Suits
  • Access to Courts
    • Liability Waivers
    • State Legislation
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Powered by Genesis

You are here: Home / Exxon Climate Investigation / Exxon Continues First Amendment Defense in Climate Fraud Probes
Exxon Continues First Amendment Defense in Climate Fraud Probes

Exxon Continues First Amendment Defense in Climate Fraud Probes

January 16, 2018 Filed Under: Exxon Climate Investigation

print
By Karen Savage

Exxon continues to cry foul, alleging that two state attorneys general are violating its First Amendment right to express its  opinion on climate change.

In a brief filed last week in New York, attorneys for Exxon once again asserted that that investigations by Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and New York Attorney Eric Schneiderman are part of a politically motivated conspiracy against the company and an attempt to silence the oil giant through intimidation.

The filing was the latest effort by Exxon to thwart investigations by the attorneys general into possible climate change-related deception by the company. It follows a filing by the AGs in December urging a dismissal of Exxon’s suit against them, based on the company’s recent announcement that it would begin considering climate risks on its business in disclosures to its stockholders. Healey and Schneiderman contend that announcement equates to an admission that Exxon has not been forthcoming about those risks as the AGs have alleged.

But Exxon continues to insist that the investigations are an abuse of Healey’s and Schneiderman’s political positions and are violations of the oil giant’s First, Fourth and Fourteenth amendment rights.

In November, New York U.S. District Court Judge Valerie Caproni ordered each side to submit written arguments in the case, which was first filed by Exxon in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in June 2016, but has since been transferred to New York.

In its most recent brief, attorneys for Exxon said the attorneys general are targeting Exxon with “burdensome” and “harassing” investigations because of the company’s views on climate change. Attorneys also link Healey and Schneiderman to climate activists who Exxon says are seeking to “harass perceived political opponents” and “delegitimize” Exxon.

Attorneys for Healey call Exxon’s allegations absurd, particularly considering Exxon has taken the public stance of supporting the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change.  

“Exxon asserts that Attorney General Healey has joined in an illegal conspiracy to violate Exxon’s rights because she does not agree with Exxon’s views about climate change. Yet Exxon also states that it now endorses climate science, the existence of climate change, and efforts to combat it—consistent with Attorney Healey’s position,” Healey’s attorneys wrote in a recent brief.

Schneiderman’s attorneys said that for Exxon to prevail on a free speech allegation, it must plead and prove its right to free speech has been violated, something they contend Exxon has not done.

They point to Exxon’s own court filings, in which the company said it speaks publicly about the risks of climate change and shares its perspective on climate change on the company’s website.

In a website posting last week, Exxon denounced a recent climate change-related lawsuit filed against it by New York City and reiterated its climate change perspective. A video shared on the company’s Twitter page carried a similar message.

“These public statements demonstrate that, far from being muzzled, Exxon regularly engages in corporate advocacy concerning climate change,” wrote attorneys for Schneiderman, adding that a state investigation is not a violation of Exxon’s constitutionally protected rights.

Schneiderman also said that fraudulent statements are not protected by the First Amendment.

Exxon fired back, alleging that not only are its statements protected but also the company has been harmed by having to endure the “burden and expense” of the investigations.

“Based on the record before this Court, there is no basis to classify ExxonMobil’s speech on climate change and climate policy as anything but fully protected by the First Amendment,” wrote attorneys for Exxon.

But attorneys for Healey said Exxon’s recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission that promised climate risk disclosure raises further questions about the company’s truthfulness.

That decision came after 62 percent of Exxon shareholders voted in favor of requiring the company to produce a report outlining financial risks to the company from global efforts to prevent temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius.

“This filing makes clear that, at a minimum, Exxon’s prior disclosures to investors, including Massachusetts investors, may not have adequately accounted for the effect of climate change on its business and assets,” attorneys for Healey wrote.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

Filed Under: Exxon Climate Investigation

Don't Miss a story
Subscribe 
We promise not to spam you. Unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.

Trackbacks

  1. Groups urge California AG to join Exxon climate fraud probe says:
    January 17, 2018 at 2:38 pm

    […] Exxon Continues First Amendment Defense in Climate Fraud Probes […]

  2. Judge orders more Exxon disclosures in New York climate probe says:
    August 30, 2018 at 1:11 pm

    […] for Exxon, which has accused the attorney general’s office of conducting a politically motivated investigation, argue they […]

  3. Exxon: First Amendment ruling on NRA applies to climate probes says:
    November 26, 2018 at 10:48 pm

    […] has been pursuing a case against the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts since 2016, alleging that their investigations are an abuse of their political positions and violate the oil giant’s First, Fourth and […]

  4. The Banner, Vol. 4, No. 48 – Courts Step Up. Sometimes. - The Banner says:
    November 27, 2018 at 2:18 am

    […] has been pursuing a case against the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts since 2016, alleging that their investigations are an abuse of their political positions and violate the oil giant’s First, Fourth and […]

  5. Oil industry supporters argue cities cannot sue for climate liability says:
    May 22, 2019 at 3:17 pm

    […] has invoked this First Amendment defense in attempting to quash investigations into its alleged deception by the attorneys general of New […]

Don't Miss a story
Subscribe 
We promise not to spam you. Unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.

Latest News

Justice Dept. to Argue on Side of Oil Companies in Supreme Court Hearing

By Karen Savage The acting solicitor general will be allowed time to argue in support of ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP and nearly two dozen other companies next week during oral arguments before … [Read More...]

Recent Posts

  • Colorado Judge Rejects Oil Companies’ Attempt to Move Climate Case
  • Biden’s DOJ Could Help Swing Momentum Around Climate Cases
  • Supreme Court Questions Oil Companies’ Tactics to Shake Climate Cases
  • Will Amy Coney Barrett, Whose Father Was a Shell Attorney for Decades, Recuse from Climate Suit?

Most Popular

  • Climate Case Gets Green Light from European Union Court
  • Documents Detail What Shell Knew About Climate Change Decades Ago
  • France, Home of the Paris Agreement, Faces Lawsuit for Lack of Climate Progress
  • BP Accused of 'Greenwashing' and Deceiving Public With Renewable Energy Ads
  • Court: Climate Impacts of Pipeline Projects Cannot Be Ignored

Categories

  • Access to Courts
  • Baltimore Lawsuit
  • California Climate Lawsuits
  • Charleston, S.C. Lawsuit
  • Colorado Lawsuit
  • Connecticut Lawsuit
  • Delaware Lawsuit
  • Exxon Climate Investigation
  • Featured
  • Hoboken Lawsuit
  • International
  • Latest News
  • Liability Litigation
  • Liability Waivers
  • Mass. v. Exxon
  • Minnesota Lawsuit
  • New York City Lawsuit
  • Other Suits
  • Politics
  • Rhode Island Lawsuit
  • State Legislation
  • Uncategorized
  • Washington DC Lawsuit

Follow us

  • View climatedocket’s profile on Facebook
  • View climatedocket’s profile on Twitter

RSS

RSS Feed RSS - Posts

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.