Consumer advocates: Supreme Court climate case could 'rewrite' American economy

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case on Monday that could "rewrite" the future of American energy production, legal analysts said. Justices on the nation's highest court will hear arguments in Suncor v. Boulder, a case to determine whether state and local governments can use nuisance laws to seek billions of dollars in damages from energy companies. State nuisance laws are typically used to resolve disputes between neighbors. In most cases, individuals argue that certain activity negatively affects property value. In the case before the high court, government officials in Boulder, Colorado, argued that energy companies Suncor and ExxonMobil contributed to climate change by harvesting oil and natural gas resources. "They will get an order telling energy producers to stop making oil and gas and then they will get billions of dollars to fund green initiatives to undo the effects of climate change," said O.H. Skinner, executive director of the Alliance for Consumers. He pointed to policies during the Biden administration where energy production was strictly regulated. Skinner warned the court would deal a sweeping blow to energy companies if it allows the lawsuit to move forward. "They could end up with an order that will rewrite the American economy," Skinner said. Former Alaska Attorney General Steve Cox said the court's ruling would have a drastic impact on how natural resources are gathered in Alaska. He said Alaska's oil, gas, copper, gold and silver reserves would be fiercely regulated if justices on the high court agreed with Boulder, Colorado. "If these tort lawyers are able to bankrupt the oil and gas industry, you can bankrupt Alaska as a result," Cox said. Cox pointed to dozens of climate change lawsuits across the country with similar arguments to Boulder. He said the cases will have implications for energy companies across the United States and around the world. Michael O'Neill, assistant general counsel of the Landmark Legal Foundation, said the climate change activist interests are central to the issues at play in the case before justices on the high court. "This is another effort, I think, for certain interests to drive out fossil fuel burning powerplants," O'Neill said. Skinner and O'Neill acknowledged Justice Samuel Alito's decision to recuse himself from consideration of the case. Skinner said the case will be more difficult to decide without Alito's participation, as there will be one less conservative justice to potentially rule in favor of the energy companies. "I have every reason to believe that there are five justices on the conservative side who do not think that courts can do cross-border stuff like this," Skinner said. Justices on the high court will hear arguments in the case on Oct. 5.