Boulder and Boulder County’s climate lawsuit will test whether local governments can seek damages in state court or whether the federal government controls greenhouse gas emissions. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the case Monday. Its decision could shape similar lawsuits nationwide.
The city and county sued Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil in 2018, seeking unspecified damages under state law to help cover costs from worsening disasters. The companies say state-court lawsuits aren’t the way to address a global problem. The Trump administration backs the companies, arguing that the suits amount to an unconstitutional power grab.
Who Holds Regulatory Power
Federal government attorneys argue that the Clean Air Act gives the federal government, not states, authority to regulate emissions. They say a state can’t impose its regulatory preferences on other states to address a problem that exists largely beyond its borders. “No one state can superimpose its own regulatory preferences on the rest — least of all to address a global problem that exists almost entirely outside its borders and affects the world at large,” they wrote.
Boulder says it seeks compensation for local costs, not authority to regulate emissions elsewhere. “Boulder County and city aren’t trying to change what’s happening in Texas or New York, they’re trying to get compensation for things happening now in Colorado,” said Sam Sankar, senior vice president at Earthjustice, which filed an amicus brief.
The federal government’s position comes as its own environmental authority has shifted. Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency repealed rules limiting greenhouse gas emissions from coal- and natural-gas-fired power plants, giving up some of its climate authority. That move could complicate the government’s argument.
Local Costs and the Marshall Fire
The lawsuit came before the 2021 Marshall Fire, which was considered a climate change factor and destroyed Tawnya Somauroo’s home. The fire caused an estimated $2 billion in damage. It was the costliest wildfire in Colorado history.
Somauroo said she received the first warning that the fire was headed for her suburban street less than an hour before her home burned. She has worked to rebuild and make her neighborhood better able to withstand another blaze. Careful landscaping, metal fencing and flame-resistant siding still may not be enough, she worries.
“We lost our homes and they left us to figure out for ourselves how to make our neighborhoods safe again,” Somauroo said. “At the end of the day, it comes out of our pockets, you know? And it does feel like maybe the oil and gas industry should have a part in this.”
Boulder County is one of dozens of jurisdictions across the United States suing oil and gas companies to help pay for damage from disasters linked to climate change. These cases form part of a wider wave of litigation in the United States and around the world, with billions of dollars at stake.
A Court Decision With National Reach
Phil Goldberg, special counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, an industry group, said climate change is caused by “pretty much everybody living on earth.” He said the problem needs meaningful action. “This litigation doesn’t do that.”
The conservative-majority Supreme Court has previously limited federal environmental regulatory authority. A 2022 decision limited the EPA’s authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. Justice Samuel Alito recused himself a week before arguments after calls for him to step aside because he owns stock in oil companies. Eight of the nine justices are expected to sit, so a tie vote remains possible.
The court is also weighing whether it has jurisdiction to hear the case at this stage, a question experts describe as a potential “off-ramp.” Chris Winter, executive director of the Getches-Wilkinson Center, an environmental research group in Colorado, said local governments play an important role in helping communities adapt to climate change. “This case could very well set a precedent.”