The suits are part of a coordinated effort targeting oil companies from dozens of Democratic-led cities and states
The Department of Justice is asking the Maryland supreme court to dismiss three local lawsuits, which accuse the nation’s largest oil companies of selling products that they know cause global warming. It represents the first time the Trump DOJ has weighed in on such active litigation, which has become more common in recent years and seeks to extract crippling damages from oil companies.
In a brief filed this week, officials in the DOJ’s environment division said the issues covered in the cases—like air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and climate change—are national and international matters. Using state law to regulate those issues, therefore, “would override policy choices made by the federal government and Maryland’s sister states,” the brief added.
“Each state is alone responsible for controlling air pollution within its borders—subject to EPA oversight—and [federal law] contemplates no role for states reaching out and applying their law in other states,” it stated.
The filing sends a clear message that the Trump administration is prepared to fight the lawsuits and assert its authority over such issues. It marks the first time that the administration has weighed in on active climate litigation. The DOJ sued Michigan and Hawaii in May to prevent the states from pursuing similar litigation mirroring the three cases in Maryland, but those two states had not yet filed lawsuits against oil companies.
The Maryland cases—which prosecutors filed in Baltimore, Annapolis, and Anne Arundel County between 2018 and 2021—are part of a coordinated effort from dozens of Democratic-led cities and states, which have filed identical lawsuits against many of the same companies. If the pending lawsuits are all successful, oil companies would collectively be forced to pay in excess of $1 trillion in damages.
Critics of the effort say it is designed to bankrupt oil companies and decimate the industry to accelerate an economy-wide transition to green energy. They have also noted that the majority of cities and states involved in the effort employ the same outside law firm, San Francisco-based Sher Edling, which is funded by powerful left-wing environmental nonprofits.
“When states seek to regulate energy beyond their constitutional or statutory authority, they harm the country’s ability to produce energy and they aid our adversaries,” acting assistant attorney general Adam Gustafson said in a statement after the DOJ sued Michigan and Hawaii in May.
Gustafson was one of the authors of the DOJ’s brief filed with the Maryland supreme court.
In addition to the DOJ, meanwhile, 24 Republican state attorneys general, 2 former joint chiefs of staff, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the National Association of Manufacturers filed briefs in the Maryland cases this week.
“Alleging liability for emissions from sources outside Maryland, the suits at hand represent interstate controversies that cannot be resolved under state law and must be dismissed,” the 24 attorneys general wrote in their filing.
Lower court judges dismissed the Baltimore, Annapolis, and Anne Arundel County lawsuits in recent months, ruling that local jurisdictions cannot use the courts to implement nationwide climate policies. The cases were consolidated before the state’s high court after officials appealed those rulings.
BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, CITGO, ConocoPhillips, Marathon Oil, and Hess are among the defendants listed in the Maryland cases.
Read the full article here
