Quantcast
Environmental News for a Healthier Planet and Life

Help Support EcoWatch

Climate Liability Lawsuit Decision in Rhode Island a 'Welcome Sign' for Those Seeking Damages

Insights + Opinion
Pawtuxett River flooding on March 30, 2010 in Warwick, Rhode Island. National Guard troops were activated in Massachusetts and Rhode Island where a state of emergency was declared. Darren McCollester / Getty Images

By Jessica Corbett

In what one advocate called a "big win" for climate liability litigation, a federal judge on Monday remanded Rhode Island's lawsuit targeting 21 fossil fuel giants to state court, where the oil and gas companies are more likely to be forced to pay for their significant contributions to the global climate crisis.


Last July, Rhode Island became the first state in the country to file suit against dirty energy companies — including BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil and Shell — seeking to hold them accountable for knowingly contributing to a climate emergency that is "causing catastrophic consequences to Rhode Island, our economy, our communities, our residents, our ecosystems."

The Ocean State accused fossil fuel producers of "externalizing the responsibility" for the consequences of the human-caused crisis — such as sea level rise, drought, extreme precipitation, and heatwaves, and the damage those events cause — by expecting taxpayers to foot the bill.

The case was filed in state court. In response, the fossil fuel industry employed a strategy of trying to move climate liability suits filed by municipalities or states to federal court, where the companies are more likely to win — in part because of differences in case law.

Judge William Smith of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island delivered a blow to the industry's strategy in his Monday ruling. Smith wrote that "because there is no federal jurisdiction under the various statutes and doctrines adverted to by defendants, the court grants the state's motion to remand."

"Climate change is expensive, and the state wants help paying for it," the judge wrote. He also pointed out that the defendants, collectively, "have extracted, advertised, and sold a substantial percentage of the fossil fuels burned globally since the 1960s."

"This activity has released an immense amount of greenhouse gas into the Earth's atmosphere, changing its climate and leading to all kinds of displacement, death (extinctions, even), and destruction," he continued. "What is more, defendants understood the consequences of their activity decades ago, when transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable sources of energy would have saved a world of trouble."

"But instead of sounding the alarm, defendants went out of their way to becloud the emerging scientific consensus and further delay changes — however existentially necessary — that would in any way interfere with their multi-billion-dollar profits," Smith added. "All while quietly readying their capital for the coming fallout."

Ann Carlson — an environmental law professor at UCLA's Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment who has done pro-bono consulting for municipality cases — explained to Climate Liability News that "the district court's decision to send Rhode Island's case back to state court is important because what the oil companies are really after is dismissal of the case under federal law."

According to Carson, "They want a big substantive outcome — to get rid of the case altogether."

Rhode Island Democratic Attorney General Peter Neronha, who took over the state lawsuit filed by his predecessor, welcomed the judge's ruling. He said in a statement that "as the federal court recognized, the state's lawsuit contains no federal question or cause of action, rather, contains only state law causes of action regarding damage to Rhode Island's resources that are better suited to resolution in the state courts."

Smith's decision was also celebrated by Richard Wiles, executive director of the Center for Climate Integrity, who told The Hill that "this is more bad news for Exxon and a welcome sign for taxpayers and local governments seeking just compensation for climate damages oil and gas companies knowingly caused."

"Big oil and gas producers are desperate to stay out of state courts where tobacco lost and and opioid manufacturers are on the ropes," said Wiles. "But now a third federal district court has ruled that state courts are where climate liability cases belong."

Summarizing the other two wins Wiles referenced, Climate Liability News reported that "a federal judge in Maryland recently remanded Baltimore's suit to state court and a group of California communities won a decision by U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria that their cases belong in state court, a decision under appeal to the Ninth Circuit."

Reposted with permission from our media associate Common Dreams.

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

A warning sign near the Dakota Access Pipeline endpoint in Patoka, Illinois on Nov. 11, 2016. Cyrene Krey / Flickr

The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline won a reprieve Wednesday when an appeals court canceled a lower court order mandating the pipeline be shut down and emptied of oil while a full environmental impact statement is completed.

Read More Show Less

Democrats in the House and Senate have introduced legislation to ban some of the most toxic pesticides currently in use in the U.S. D-Keine / E+ / Getty Images

By Jake Johnson

Democrats in the House and Senate on Tuesday introduced sweeping legislation that would ban some of the most toxic pesticides currently in use in the U.S. and institute stronger protections for farmworkers and communities that have been exposed to damaging chemicals by the agriculture industry.

Read More Show Less
A British Petroleum petrol station on March 10, 2017, in Ciudad Satelite, Naucalpan de Juarez municipality, Mexico State. The company will reportedly start to offer electric vehicle recharging stations at its retail gasoline stations. RONALDO SCHEMIDT / AFP via Getty Images

BP, the energy giant that grew from oil and gas production, is taking its business in a new direction, announcing Tuesday that it will slash its oil and gas production by 40 percent and increase its annual investment in low-carbon technology to $5 billion, a ten-fold increase over its current level, according to CNN.

Read More Show Less
Recycled paper at the Northern Adelaide Waste Management Authority's recycling site piles up in Edinburgh, Australia, on April 17, 2019. Brenton Edwards / AFP / Getty Images

By Alex Thornton

The Australian government has announced a A$190 million (US$130 million) investment in the nation's first Recycling Modernization Fund, with the aim of transforming the country's waste and recycling industry. The hope is that as many as 10,000 jobs can be created in what is being called a "once in a generation" opportunity to remodel the way Australia deals with its waste.

Read More Show Less
President Trump displays his signature after signing The Great American Outdoors Act on August 4, 2020. The White House

The Great American Outdoors Act is now the law of the land.

Read More Show Less
The aftermath from the 2017 Tubbs Fire in Santa Rosa, which killed 22 people in California's Sonoma and Napa counties. The National Guard / Flickr / CC by 2.0

By Andrew J. Whelton and Caitlin R. Proctor

In recent years wildfires have entered urban areas, causing breathtaking destruction.

Read More Show Less

Trending

The Wildlife from Space project uses satellite technology to identify, count and monitor species such as emperor penguins in Antarctica. British Antarctic Survey / YouTube

New satellite images have revealed 11 new throngs of emperor penguin colonies, lifting the number of known emperor penguin colonies by 20 percent and their total population by 5 to 10 percent, according to The Guardian.

Read More Show Less