Judge Throws Out Blue City’s Climate Case Against Oil Giants

A judge tossed out Baltimore’s climate lawsuit against major energy corporations on Wednesday.

Judge Videtta Brown of the Baltimore City Circuit Court ruled Wednesday to throw out the city’s lawsuit seeking to hold major oil companies — including British Petroleum (BP), Chevron and ExxonMobil — liable for climate change and an alleged effort to deceive the public about the environmental damage they knew their products would cause. Brown wrote that the lawsuit “goes beyond the limits of Maryland state law” in her ruling.

Baltimore’s litigation was one of many similarly-styled lawsuits against major oil companies being pursued by Democratic jurisdictions, including Minnesota and San Francisco. Like others, Baltimore argued that the oil giants should compensate the city for the effects of climate change.

Baltimore Climate Case Ruling by Nick Pope on Scribd

“This court finds that Baltimore’s complaint is entirely about addressing the injuries of global climate change and seeking damages for such alleged injuries. The explanation by Baltimore that it only seeks to address and hold Defendants accountable for a deceptive misinformation campaign is simply a way to get in the back door what they cannot get in the front door,” Brown wrote in the ruling. “Whether the complaint is characterized one way or another, the analysis and the answer are the same — the Constitution’s federal structure does not allow the application of state law to claims like those presented by Baltimore.”

Brown’s legal analysis resembles that of other critics of the climate lawsuit phenomenon, including those who filed amicus briefs with the Supreme Court this spring pertaining to Honolulu’s similar climate nuisance lawsuit against oil giants, for example.

Beyond concerns about federalism, other observers have pointed out that different rulings in different courts regarding oil companies’ liability for climate change could imperil national security by undermining national energy production.

“The Court’s well-reasoned opinion recognizes that climate policy cannot be advanced by the unconstitutional application of state law to regulate global emissions,” Theodore Boutrous Jr., Chevron’s counsel, said of the ruling. “As the court stated, Baltimore’s claims are ‘beyond the limits of Maryland state law’ and ‘cannot survive because they are preempted by federal common law (and the Clean Air Act).’  The meritless state tort cases now being orchestrated by a small group of plaintiffs’ lawyers only detract from legitimate progress toward a lower carbon global energy system.”

The office of Democratic Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott, BP and ExxonMobil did not respond immediately to requests for comment.