Liberal justices probe jurisdiction, sparking claims of an escape route in climate case
Justices Jackson and Sotomayor repeatedly questioned the Court’s jurisdiction in Suncor v. Boulder, leading conservatives to accuse them of seeking an escape route.
The Supreme Court’s first arguments of the term addressed Suncor v. Boulder, a dispute over whether Colorado can pursue climate-damage claims against oil producers under state tort law. Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor repeatedly asked about the Court’s jurisdiction, indicating the case might be too early for review and hinting at sending it back to the Colorado Supreme Court. Conservative legal groups said the liberal justices were looking for an “off-ramp” to avoid a vote on whether the Clean Air Act preempts such state actions.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Clarence Thomas probed the potential nationwide impact of a Boulder victory. Attorneys for Suncor warned that accepting the claim could open litigation in thousands of jurisdictions. The decision will determine whether the federal government or individual states control climate-policy litigation.
Why it matters
The ruling will shape whether states can sue oil companies for climate harms or if such actions remain under federal control.
How this story developed
- Sep 28 Justice Samuel Alito withdraws from high-profile climate lawsuit
- Oct 2 Justice Alito announced he will not sit on the case.
- Oct 2 Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito said he regularly considers retirement because of his age, though he believes he can still contribute.
- Oct 4 Alito reiterated that his retirement timing remains uncertain and will be reconsidered next year.
In this story
Related stories
18 in this thread