On Wednesday, December 28, the NAM filed an amicus brief in support of energy manufacturers’ petition seeking U.S. Supreme Court review of the lower courts’ remand order in a case asserting “public nuisance” claims related to climate change. This case, Chevron Corporation, et al. v. San Mateo County, California, et al., is one of over two dozen public nuisance cases seeking to drive national energy policy on climate change. The 9th Circuit upheld the district court’s decision to remand the case to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
In our brief, the NAM 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. This case has important implications for all manufacturers because of the growing trend among plaintiffs’ lawyers of using public nuisance and consumer deception claims to seek monetary damages from manufacturers for broad, societal issues that are ill-suited for consideration by a patchwork of state court determinations and should be addressed in the policy process.
Unfortunately, on April 24, 2023, the Court denied the energy manufacturers' petition.