Editing article

Title

Summary

Content

FIRST ON FOX – A group of nearly two-dozen Republican attorneys general is <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/category/politics/judiciary/supreme-court" target="_blank" rel="noopener">asking the Supreme Court</a> to intervene in a climate change liability case out of Hawaii they say could have "grave" consequences on American energy production.In February, a coalition of major oil companies asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on the <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/big-oil-companies-ask-supreme-court-intervene-high-stakes-climate-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">city of Honolulu’s lawsuit</a> that accused the companies of deceiving the public about their role in causing global warming, which could in turn cost the companies billions in damages. Led by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall, 20 states on Monday filed an amicus brief asking the high court to review the case — arguing that the lawsuit, and several others like it percolating in the lower courts, is "an affront to the equal sovereignty" of their states and an attempt by one state to use its own laws to impose its energy policies nationwide."The grave threat these suits pose to equal sovereignty and our Nation’s energy infrastructure are reason enough for this Court to grant review," the filing states.<a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/left-wing-groups-increasingly-using-courts-push-green-new-deal-report" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CONSUMER GROUP REVEALS LEFT-WING GROUPS INCREASINGLY USING COURTS TO PUSH GREEN NEW DEAL</a>In 2020, the city of Honolulu sued several major fossil fuel companies, including Exxon and Chevron, claiming the companies’ products cause greenhouse gas emissions and global warming without warning consumers about the risks. The city employed a series of state laws like public nuisance and trespass measures and said the companies should pay billions to the state to abate the effects of climate change like weather events, sea level rise, heat waves, flooding, and global warming generally. The energy companies appealed to the <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/category/us/us-regions/west/hawaii" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hawaii Supreme Court,</a> arguing federal law prevents individual states from effectively shaping energy policies for all states, but that court disagreed."The time for this Court’s intervention is now," the AGs wrote in their brief, adding that "reducing the sale and use of traditional energy everywhere is not among a State’s constitutional powers."They say the case presents a "unique opportunity" because Hawaii courts granted a rare appeal option and stayed most of the discovery in the case while parties went through the appeals process. "The Court should act before state courts issue preliminary relief that could trigger a national emergency or fashion a patchwork of new taxes on the Nation’s energy system that would make life harder for every American," the AGs wrote. In an interview with Fox News Digital, Attorney General Marshall said the lawsuit is "an effort by environmentalists to control energy policy in this country.""They're attempting to do it through friendly forums, in this case, state court in Hawaii. And the people of Alabama absolutely object to a state court judge in Hawaii ultimately determining how it is that we deal with the fossil fuel industry here in this country," he said. <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/billionaire-fueled-rockefeller-fund-coordinated-climate-lawsuits-dem-state-ag-internal-documents" target="_blank" rel="noopener">BILLIONAIRE-FUELED ROCKEFELLER FUND COORDINATED CLIMATE LAWSUITS WITH DEM STATE AG: INTERNAL DOCUMENTS</a>"What we see here is the use of a damages verdict to either change the behavior of fossil fuel companies, or exponentially increase the cost of energy to the citizens of the United States," Marshall explained. The attorneys general argue – and cite America’s rich state-sovereignty precedent – that federal common law already says disputes relating to cross-border pollution ought to be decided by federal courts, not states. They also cite the Clean Air Act, which they argue still lets states have certain powers to regulate emissions notwithstanding federal intervention. The Clean Air Act recognizes "the primary responsibility" of states to prevent and control "air pollution … at its source.""The statutory scheme exemplifies cooperative federalism, permitting States to implement their own regulations consistent with a federal baseline," the AGs write in their brief. "As a result, our federal system allows States to pursue divergent policies with respect to energy production and environmental protection." "You don't want to allow states like Hawaii or California to define energy policy for the entire country. But they're using the threat of a massive jury verdict, to be able to bankrupt the fossil fuel industry," Marshall told Fox News Digital."And that's not good for the citizens of Alabama. It's not good for providing affordable energy and available energy to the people of this country," he said.<a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dark-money-fueled-law-firm-joins-massachusetts-climate-suit-against-big-oil" target="_blank" rel="noopener">DARK MONEY-FUELED LAW FIRM JOINS MASSACHUSETTS CLIMATE SUIT AGAINST BIG OIL</a>"Although a case nestled in the state of Hawaii, a long way from us here in Alabama, it's critically important for us to be engaged. And in fact, critically important for the Supreme Court, ultimately to help decide this issue," he said. The AGs said in the brief that the "theory used against energy companies can be expanded to allow targeting of any cross-border activity that purportedly ‘exacerbate[s] the impacts of climate change.’" One example they point to happened just a few weeks ago, when the State of New York sued "the world’s largest producer of beef products, for misleading the public about its environmental impact."The beef producer’s stated commitment to reach "Net Zero by 2040" is allegedly misleading because the company "plans to grow global demand for its product," rather than "reduce production of and demand for" it. The company’s emissions "of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere and … supply chain practices" purportedly "contribut[e] to climate change harms.""New York’s complaint alleges that ‘the world’s top five meat and dairy corporations combined are responsible for more annual greenhouse gas emissions than ExxonMobil, Shell, or BP, individually.’  Surely in some State’s view, those companies too (and countless others) have ‘exacerbated the impacts of climate change,’" the AG’s brief states."But the States, upon entering the Union, gave up the right to use their laws for this sort of interstate conflict. The Court should grant review here before any further damage is done to our national economy and our federal scheme," it concludes. The city of Honolulu is expected to file its response on May 1, with a final brief scheduled to be May 15. A decision from the Supreme Court on whether they will review the case could come in June.Fox News Digital reached out to the City and County of Honolulu for a response to the amicus brief.

Author

Link

Published date

Image url

Feed url

Guid

Hidden blurb

--- !ruby/object:Feedjira::Parser::RSSEntry
published: 2024-04-01 20:07:40.000000000 Z
carlessian_info:
 news_filer_version: 2
 newspaper: US - Fox News
 macro_region: USA
entry_id: !ruby/object:Feedjira::Parser::GloballyUniqueIdentifier
 is_perma_link: 'true'
 guid: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-state-ags-press-supreme-court-take-up-hawaii-climate-change-case-they-say-grave-threat
title: GOP state AGs press Supreme Court to take up Hawaii climate change case they
 say is 'grave threat'
categories:
- eff0cbe0-35d6-5be6-b062-66e6cadf3c12
- fnc
- Fox News
- fox-news/politics/judiciary/supreme-court
- fox-news/world/environment/climate-change
- fox-news/us/environment
- fox-news/us/us-regions/west/hawaii
- fox-news/us/us-regions/southeast/alabama
- fox-news/politics
- fox-news/politics
- article
content: 'FIRST ON FOX – A group of nearly two-dozen Republican
 attorneys general is <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/category/politics/judiciary/supreme-court"
 target="_blank" rel="noopener">asking the Supreme Court</a> to intervene in a climate
 change liability case out of Hawaii they say could have "grave" consequences on
 American energy production.In February, a coalition of major oil companies
 asked the Supreme Court to weigh in on the <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/big-oil-companies-ask-supreme-court-intervene-high-stakes-climate-case"
 target="_blank" rel="noopener">city of Honolulu’s lawsuit</a> that accused the companies
 of deceiving the public about their role in causing global warming, which could
 in turn cost the companies billions in damages. Led by Alabama Attorney General
 Steve Marshall, 20 states on Monday filed an amicus brief asking the high court
 to review the case — arguing that the lawsuit, and several others like it percolating
 in the lower courts, is "an affront to the equal sovereignty" of their states and
 an attempt by one state to use its own laws to impose its energy policies nationwide."The
 grave threat these suits pose to equal sovereignty and our Nation’s energy infrastructure
 are reason enough for this Court to grant review," the filing states.<a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/left-wing-groups-increasingly-using-courts-push-green-new-deal-report"
 target="_blank" rel="noopener">CONSUMER GROUP REVEALS LEFT-WING GROUPS
 INCREASINGLY USING COURTS TO PUSH GREEN NEW DEAL</a>In 2020,
 the city of Honolulu sued several major fossil fuel companies, including Exxon and
 Chevron, claiming the companies’ products cause greenhouse gas emissions and global
 warming without warning consumers about the risks. The city employed a series
 of state laws like public nuisance and trespass measures and said the companies
 should pay billions to the state to abate the effects of climate change like weather
 events, sea level rise, heat waves, flooding, and global warming generally. The
 energy companies appealed to the <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/category/us/us-regions/west/hawaii"
 target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hawaii Supreme Court,</a> arguing federal law prevents
 individual states from effectively shaping energy policies for all states, but that
 court disagreed."The time for this Court’s intervention is now," the AGs
 wrote in their brief, adding that "reducing the sale and use of traditional energy
 everywhere is not among a State’s constitutional powers."They say
 the case presents a "unique opportunity" because Hawaii courts granted a rare appeal
 option and stayed most of the discovery in the case while parties went through the
 appeals process. "The Court should act before state courts issue preliminary
 relief that could trigger a national emergency or fashion a patchwork of new taxes
 on the Nation’s energy system that would make life harder for every American," the
 AGs wrote. In an interview with Fox News Digital, Attorney General Marshall
 said the lawsuit is "an effort by environmentalists to control energy policy in
 this country.""They''re attempting to do it through friendly forums, in this
 case, state court in Hawaii. And the people of Alabama absolutely object to a state
 court judge in Hawaii ultimately determining how it is that we deal with the fossil
 fuel industry here in this country," he said. <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/billionaire-fueled-rockefeller-fund-coordinated-climate-lawsuits-dem-state-ag-internal-documents"
 target="_blank" rel="noopener">BILLIONAIRE-FUELED ROCKEFELLER FUND COORDINATED
 CLIMATE LAWSUITS WITH DEM STATE AG: INTERNAL DOCUMENTS</a>"What
 we see here is the use of a damages verdict to either change the behavior of fossil
 fuel companies, or exponentially increase the cost of energy to the citizens of
 the United States," Marshall explained. The attorneys general argue – and
 cite America’s rich state-sovereignty precedent – that federal common law already
 says disputes relating to cross-border pollution ought to be decided by federal
 courts, not states. They also cite the Clean Air Act, which they argue still
 lets states have certain powers to regulate emissions notwithstanding federal intervention. The
 Clean Air Act recognizes "the primary responsibility" of states to prevent and control
 "air pollution … at its source.""The statutory scheme exemplifies cooperative
 federalism, permitting States to implement their own regulations consistent with
 a federal baseline," the AGs write in their brief. "As a result, our federal
 system allows States to pursue divergent policies with respect to energy production
 and environmental protection." "You don''t want to allow states like Hawaii
 or California to define energy policy for the entire country. But they''re using
 the threat of a massive jury verdict, to be able to bankrupt the fossil fuel industry,"
 Marshall told Fox News Digital."And that''s not good for the citizens of
 Alabama. It''s not good for providing affordable energy and available energy to
 the people of this country," he said.<a href="https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dark-money-fueled-law-firm-joins-massachusetts-climate-suit-against-big-oil"
 target="_blank" rel="noopener">DARK MONEY-FUELED LAW FIRM JOINS MASSACHUSETTS
 CLIMATE SUIT AGAINST BIG OIL</a>"Although a case nestled in
 the state of Hawaii, a long way from us here in Alabama, it''s critically important
 for us to be engaged. And in fact, critically important for the Supreme Court, ultimately
 to help decide this issue," he said. The AGs said in the brief that the "theory
 used against energy companies can be expanded to allow targeting of any cross-border
 activity that purportedly ‘exacerbate[s] the impacts of climate change.’" One
 example they point to happened just a few weeks ago, when the State of New York
 sued "the world’s largest producer of beef products, for misleading the public about
 its environmental impact."The beef producer’s stated commitment to reach
 "Net Zero by 2040" is allegedly misleading because the company "plans to grow global
 demand for its product," rather than "reduce production of and demand for" it. The
 company’s emissions "of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere and … supply chain practices"
 purportedly "contribut[e] to climate change harms.""New York’s complaint
 alleges that ‘the world’s top five meat and dairy corporations combined are responsible
 for more annual greenhouse gas emissions than ExxonMobil, Shell, or BP, individually.’
  Surely in some State’s view, those companies too (and countless others) have ‘exacerbated
 the impacts of climate change,’" the AG’s brief states."But the States, upon
 entering the Union, gave up the right to use their laws for this sort of interstate
 conflict. The Court should grant review here before any further damage is done to
 our national economy and our federal scheme," it concludes. The city of Honolulu
 is expected to file its response on May 1, with a final brief scheduled to be May
 15. A decision from the Supreme Court on whether they will review the case could
 come in June.Fox News Digital reached out to the City and County of Honolulu
 for a response to the amicus brief.'
summary: 20 Republican state attorneys general are asking the Supreme Court to intervene
 in a climate change case they say could have &quot;grave&quot; consequences on American
 energy production.
rss_fields:
- title
- url
- summary
- categories
- published
- entry_id
- content
- image
url: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gop-state-ags-press-supreme-court-take-up-hawaii-climate-change-case-they-say-grave-threat
image: https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2024/04/931/523/supreme-court-Steve-Marshall.jpg?ve=1&tl=1

Language

Active

Ricc internal notes

Ricc source

Show this article Back to articles