supreme-court-sunny-wide.jpg
May 27, 2021 by Karen Sokol

Drilled News Op-Ed: The Supreme Court’s Obscure Procedural Ruling In Baltimore’s Climate Case, Explained

This op-ed was originally published in Drilled News on May 26, 2021. This is an excerpt.

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on an important case about whether major oil and gas companies should be held accountable for engaging in a systematic marketing campaign to deceive the public about the catastrophic threat that fossil fuel products pose to the planet. 

The Court didn’t consider the merits of the case but rather answered an obscure procedural question in a way that permits the defendants to continue to delay litigation in state court, and thereby also serves to deny the public essential information about the fossil fuel industry’s attempt to spread disinformation about its products’ role in fueling the climate crisis.

In the case, Baltimore alleges that the companies used deceptive marketing tactics to hide the danger of fossil fuel products in order to preserve their massive profit streams, in violation of state tort and statutory law. Baltimore argues that these companies should thus help pay for the city’s efforts to respond to sea level rise, increased flooding, extreme heat, and other dangers to the city’s residents and infrastructure caused by the climate crisis. Numerous …

  • 1 (current)
CPR HOMEPAGE
More on CPR's Work & Scholars.
May 27, 2021

Drilled News Op-Ed: The Supreme Court’s Obscure Procedural Ruling In Baltimore’s Climate Case, Explained