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 / Latest News / Exxon Tries Same Arguments to Get Minn. Climate Suit to Federal Court

Exxon Tries Same Arguments to Get Minn. Climate Suit to Federal Court

November 12, 2020 Filed Under: Latest News, Minnesota Lawsuit

print
By Karen Savage

ExxonMobil, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and Koch Industries say Minnesota’s climate fraud lawsuit filed against them belongs in federal court.

In a brief filed Monday, the defendants rolled out many of the same arguments for federal jurisdiction that have so far failed to convince courts in dozens of similar cases around the country.

The API and the companies argue that Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison is trying to “use Minnesota law as a vehicle to force defendants to discontinue or reduce their extraction, production, promotion, and sale of fossil fuels around the world.”

Ellison, emphasizing that his case centers on consumer fraud, not emissions, said the defendants are misrepresenting the case.

“This case does not seek to limit the extraction of fossil fuels or otherwise regulate greenhouse-gas emissions,” Ellison wrote in a brief filed in September arguing that the case should be heard in state court, where it was filed in June.

The defendants contend Ellison’s complaint contradicts that position.

“By ‘seek[ing]’ to ensure that Defendants ‘bear the costs’ of alleged climate change injuries, and to recover both fines and restitution for all alleged climate change injuries purportedly suffered by the state of Minnesota, the attorney general cannot plausibly deny that its lawsuit seeks to curtail the worldwide production and sale of fossil fuels,”  Exxon attorneys, who represented all the defendants, wrote in the brief, adding that Minnesota is a “prodigious consumer and user of fossil fuels.”

Ellison has emphasized that Minnesota’s suit is not an attempt to hold the companies accountable for climate change itself, but is attempting to hold the companies accountable for deceptive trade practices and false advertising for their decades-long deception about their role in climate change

The state is seeking damages for harm and an injunction to stop the companies from further deception. The AG also wants the court to order the companies to fund a campaign to educate the public about the risks their products pose to the climate and to make all of their climate change-related research available to the public.

Following a now-predictable pattern that has played out in dozens of cases filed against fossil fuel entities by municipalities across the country, the defendants moved the case to federal court shortly after it was filed. 

The defendants want the cases heard in federal court, where they think they have a better chance of getting them dismissed. Thus far, the First, Fourth, Ninth, and Tenth circuits have upheld lower court rulings that the cases belong in state courts, where nearly all have been filed alleging violations of state laws. 

The Supreme Court has agreed to review a technicality in Baltimore’s case, however that issue involves which arguments appellate courts are authorized to review, not the merits of those arguments nor the merits of the municipalities’ claims. 

Lawsuits, particularly those filed by AGs, typically involve state law claims and are heard in state court. Exxon has argued that a similar case filed against it by Massachusetts AG Maura Healey belongs in federal court, but that contention was rejected in March. A fraud case filed against Exxon by the New York attorney general’s office went to trial in state court last year, but the state failed to prove its case.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last month that state court is the proper venue to hear Rhode Island’s climate liability lawsuit against Exxon, BP, Shell, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips and awarded the state costs associated with the appeal.

In a footnote, API, Exxon and Koch Industries argued in the filing that similar costs—which Minnesota is seeking—are unwarranted.

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, Minnesota 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

  • Will Amy Coney Barrett, Whose Father Was a Shell Attorney for Decades, Recuse from Climate Suit?
  • Vulnerable Nations Call for Ecocide to Be Recognized As an International Crime
  • U.S. Government Knew Climate Risks in 1970s, Energy Advisory Group Documents Show
  • Oil Company Will Pay $100 Million for Damaging Louisiana Coast
  • EU Families Appeal 'People's Climate Case' Dismissal

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.