Current:Home > ContactExxon Pushes Back on California Cities Suing It Over Climate Change -NextFrontier Finance
Exxon Pushes Back on California Cities Suing It Over Climate Change
View
Date:2025-04-12 12:18:40
Sign up to receive our latest reporting on climate change, energy and environmental justice, sent directly to your inbox. Subscribe here.
In keeping with a pattern of fighting in court to defend its record on climate change, ExxonMobil has gone on the offensive again to contest a series of civil lawsuits filed by coastal California communities that claim the company is responsible for damages caused by sea level rise.
While the civil lawsuits against Exxon were filed in California, the oil giant is launching its fight through a court on its home turf—in Texas.
In a petition filed Monday, Exxon complains it has become the target of a “collection of special interests and opportunistic politicians” who it says are abusing their authority to impose their viewpoint that Exxon and other fossil fuel companies concealed the dangers of greenhouse gases.
Exxon and 36 other fossil fuel companies became the target last year of civil lawsuits by four coastal cities and three counties in California that demand the companies take financial responsibility for infrastructure upgrades to offset the effects of climate change.
The lawsuits accuse the companies of knowing for nearly five decades “that greenhouse gas pollution from their fossil fuel products had a significant impact on the Earth’s climate and sea levels.” (A 2015 investigation by InsideClimate News showed through Exxon’s own documents that the company’s scientists warned its top executives about the risks of climate change as early as the 1970s and 1980s.)
In the 60-page petition filed in Tarrant County, Texas, District Court, Exxon seeks a court order allowing company lawyers to depose 16 government officials and an attorney representing some of the plaintiffs and to force them to surrender internal records. The company says those depositions and documents are necessary to allow it to determine whether evidence exists to pursue claims against the cities and counties for alleged abuse of process and civil conspiracy.
“It is reasonable to infer that the municipalities brought these lawsuits not because of a bona fide belief in any tortious conduct by the defendants or actual damage to their jurisdictions, but instead to coerce ExxonMobil and others operating in the Texas energy sector to adopt policies aligned with those favored by local politicians in California,” attorneys for the company wrote.
“ExxonMobil finds itself directly in that conspiracy’s crosshairs,” the oil giant’s attorneys state.
The petition claims that the California lawsuits are an extension of efforts by a coalition of Democratic state attorneys general pledged to holding fossil fuel companies accountable for climate change and born out of a meeting of green groups intent on ruining the industry.
“Even though it has long acknowledged the risks presented by climate change, supported the Paris climate accords, and backed a revenue-neutral carbon tax, ExxonMobil has nevertheless been targeted by state and local governments for pretextual investigations and litigation intended to cleanse the public square of alternative viewpoints,” Exxon argued.
Shifting the Blame
Central to Exxon’s plea to question the California officials is its contention that the climate change fears now being fostered in the lawsuits were never raised in discussions the municipalities had with bond investors.
“Notwithstanding their claims of imminent, allegedly near-certain harm, none of the municipalities disclosed to investors such risks in their respective bond offerings, which collectively netted over $8 billion for these local governments over the last 27 years,” Exxon argued.
Santa Cruz City Attorney Tony Condotti disputed that contention.
“The information in the complaint as to impacts of climate change on the City of Santa Cruz are well-documented, including in the City’s 2011 climate change vulnerability assessment, and our 2017 update, and are included in the City’s bond disclosures,” Condotti said in a statement to InsideClimate News.
Brian Washington, Marin County counsel, said the petition was nothing more than a diversionary attempt by Exxon to dissuade the cities and counties from pursuing their lawsuits.
“For decades, Exxon has known that carbon dioxide pollution from its products will cause just the kinds of consequences we are seeing in Marin County now,” Washington said in a statement. “We will continue to stand up for our taxpayers so that they aren’t on the hook for all the costs of addressing the damage caused by Exxon and others in the fossil fuel industry.”
Filing in Texas Court, Exxon’s Home Turf
Exxon’s legal gambit follows a similar strategy it has pursued in an attempt to derail climate fraud investigations by the attorneys general for New York and Massachusetts.
Exxon went to court in Texas to persuade a judge to block those investigations, making similar allegations of bias against the company. One of its demands was to depose Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and 15 other attorneys general. Although the judge initially ordered Healey to appear for a deposition, the order was later rescinded and the case was transferred to New York.
The new petition was filed in a Texas state court because, Exxon said, California courts lack jurisdiction over the Dallas-based company. It’s the same state court where Exxon began its fight to head off a short-lived investigation of the company by the attorney general for the U.S. Virgin Islands. Texas courts have been sympathetic to Exxon’s arguments, giving the company something of a home field advantage.
veryGood! (439)
Related
- Nevada attorney general revives 2020 fake electors case
- Michigan political parties meet to nominate candidates in competitive Supreme Court races
- After millions lose access to internet subsidy, FCC moves to fill connectivity gaps
- You'll Flip for Shawn Johnson and Andrew East's 2024 Olympics Photo Diary
- The White House is cracking down on overdraft fees
- 'He doesn't need the advice': QB Jayden Daniels wowing Commanders with early growth, poise
- Dr. Fauci was hospitalized with West Nile virus and is now recovering at home, a spokesperson says
- Macklemore Fan Arrested for Outstanding Warrant After She Was Invited Onstage
- South Korea's acting president moves to reassure allies, calm markets after Yoon impeachment
- A child was reported missing. A TV news helicopter crew spotted him on the roof playing hooky
Ranking
- House passes bill to add 66 new federal judgeships, but prospects murky after Biden veto threat
- Judge rules Breonna Taylor’s boyfriend caused her death, dismisses some charges against ex-officers
- Blake Lively Reveals She Baked “Amazing” Boob Cake for Son Olin’s First Birthday
- ESPN College Gameday: Pat McAfee pounds beers as crew starts season in Ireland
- Rylee Arnold Shares a Long
- LGBTQ advocates say Mormon church’s new transgender policies marginalize trans members
- Honolulu struggles to find a remedy for abandoned homes taken over by squatters
- Will Messi play before end of MLS season? Inter Miami star's injury update
Recommendation
Trump issues order to ban transgender troops from serving openly in the military
Texas, other GOP-led states sue over program to give immigrant spouses of US citizens legal status
Hailey Bieber Gives Birth, Welcomes First Baby With Justin Bieber
Who did Nick Saban pick to make the College Football Playoff on 'College GameDay'?
B.A. Parker is learning the banjo
Murderer's Ex-Wife Breaks Cold Case Wide Open After 35 Years in Girl on the Milk Carton Preview
North Carolina court says speedway can sue top health official over COVID-19 closure
NASCAR at Daytona summer 2024: Start time, TV, streaming, lineup for Coke Zero Sugar 400