Supreme Court to Review Local Climate Lawsuits Against Energy Companies

The high court will examine whether federal law preempts state nuisance claims over alleged climate change damages.

Published on Feb. 28, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The Supreme Court has agreed to review a Colorado ruling that allowed a lawsuit against ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy to proceed. The case examines whether state and local governments can use state nuisance laws to sue energy companies over alleged climate change damages, or if the federal Clean Air Act preempts such lawsuits. The court's decision could have major implications for a wave of similar lawsuits filed by Democratic-led governments against major oil producers.

Why it matters

These lawsuits represent an attempt by state and local governments, backed by environmental groups, to hold energy companies accountable for allegedly misleading the public about the effects of fossil fuels and climate change. A favorable ruling for the plaintiffs could open the door to multibillion-dollar settlements, similar to the 1990s tobacco litigation. However, energy companies argue the suits belong in federal court and that climate policy should be set by the appropriate branches of government, not through "fragmented state-court actions."

The details

The Supreme Court will specifically examine a Colorado Supreme Court ruling in Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, which allowed a lawsuit by the city of Boulder and Boulder and San Miguel counties to proceed against ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy. The original suit was filed in 2018 as part of a wave of lawsuits against major energy producers under state climate laws. Lower courts have dismissed many similar lawsuits, with energy companies arguing the suits belong in federal court due to the Clean Air Act.

  • On Feb. 23, 2026, the Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Colorado ruling.
  • The court is expected to examine the Colorado ruling allowing the lawsuit against ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy to proceed.

The players

Suncor Energy Inc.

An energy company named as a defendant in the Colorado lawsuit.

ExxonMobil

An energy company named as a defendant in the Colorado lawsuit and other similar lawsuits across the country.

City of Boulder

A plaintiff in the Colorado lawsuit, along with Boulder and San Miguel counties.

Boulder and San Miguel Counties

Plaintiffs in the Colorado lawsuit, along with the city of Boulder.

Manufacturers' Accountability Project

A group that focuses on litigation targeting manufacturers, whose special counsel said the Supreme Court review will bring "much-needed clarity and uniformity" to the issue.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Supreme Court review will bring much-needed clarity and uniformity to this issue and help ensure that fundamental policy decisions about energy and climate are made by the appropriate branches of government.”

— Phil Goldberg, Special Counsel, Manufacturers' Accountability Project (Reuters)

“We do not believe climate policy should be set through 'fragmented state-court actions.'”

— ExxonMobil Representative (Reuters)

What’s next

The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments in the case and issue a ruling that could have significant implications for the wave of similar lawsuits filed by state and local governments against energy companies.

The takeaway

The Supreme Court's decision in this case will provide crucial clarity on whether state and local governments can use nuisance laws to sue energy companies over climate change, or if such lawsuits are preempted by federal law. The outcome could open the door to multibillion-dollar settlements or shut down a growing legal strategy aimed at holding fossil fuel producers accountable for their role in climate change.