Law Center Search Results

The NAM filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether putative state-law tort claims alleging harm from global climate change are removable because they arise under federal law. This case is part of a broader campaign by well-funded activists, private law firms, public relations groups, and academics to influence municipalities and others to bring climate tort litigation against energy manufacturers. Here, the city of Oakland, California, sued several energy companies to seek damages for local impacts of climate change, arguing that the defendants’ sale of fossil fuels is a public nuisance that entitles the city to financial compensation. After the defendants removed the case to federal court, a federal district court dismissed the lawsuit. The Ninth Circuit later reversed and remanded the case for further proceedings. The NAM filed an amicus brief in support of the manufacturers' petition for review to the U.S. Supreme Court. The NAM's brief argues that the subject matter and remedies sought through this litigation are inherently national, as well as legislative and regulatory in nature, and that such complex policy matters should not be driven by individual state judges in individual state courtrooms applying (or misapplying) various state liability laws. Unfortunately, on June 14, 2021, the Court denied review.