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 / Liability Litigation / Washington DC Lawsuit / D.C. Makes Its Argument for Hearing Climate Case in Local Court

D.C. Makes Its Argument for Hearing Climate Case in Local Court

October 19, 2020 Filed Under: Latest News, Liability Litigation, Washington DC Lawsuit

print
By Karen Savage

Four fossil fuel companies told a U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. on Friday that D.C.’s climate fraud case filed against them belongs in federal court, despite rulings to the contrary by multiple federal and appellate courts in similar cases across the country.

ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron and Shell contend thatD.C. attorney general Karl Racine “omitted the language of federal law” from his complaint, which was filed in June, to avoid federal jurisdiction in the case. 

Racine alleges the companies knew as early as the 1950s that emissions from their products cause climate change, but violated D.C.’s consumer protection act by engaging in a decades-long campaign to cast doubt on climate research in order to protect their profits.

The companies, which moved D.C.’s case to federal court shortly after it was filed, maintain that Racine is attempting to use D.C.’s consumer protection act “as a vehicle to force defendants to discontinue or reduce their extraction, production, and sale of fossil fuels around the world.”

Racine in August filed a motion to return the case to state court, arguing that while the companies’ alleged deception is a violation of district law, it does not involve federal claims. The companies’ latest filing is in opposition to that motion.

This is the latest skirmish in an ongoing battle over whether D.C.’s case—and dozens of climate change-related cases filed by municipalities across the country—should be heard in state court, where nearly all were filed, or in federal court, where the companies think they have a better chance of winning.  

Thus far, the courts have not been persuaded by the companies’ arguments, but the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to weigh in on a technicality related to the appellate courts’ review of lower court rulings in Baltimore’s liability case. A date for arguments has not yet been set.

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: Latest News, Liability Litigation, Washington DC Lawsuit

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.
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
  • BP Accused of 'Greenwashing' and Deceiving Public With Renewable Energy Ads
  • Toronto Will Explore Suing Big Oil for Climate Costs
  • Dutch Court Upholds Urgenda, Says Government Must Reduce Emissions
  • What Oil Companies Knew About Climate Change and When: A Timeline

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.