Supreme Court to Review Boulder Climate Lawsuit Against Energy Firms

The high court will consider whether federal law preempts state-level climate litigation.

Mar. 12, 2026 at 10:58pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review a ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court that allowed Boulder's lawsuit against Exxon and Suncor Energy to proceed to trial. The lawsuit seeks to hold energy companies liable for climate change-related damages to the community. The Supreme Court will consider whether federal law preempts such state-level climate litigation.

Why it matters

The Supreme Court's decision could shape the future of climate-related lawsuits across the country, as dozens of municipalities have filed similar cases against energy producers in state courts. The outcome could determine whether these climate lawsuits can proceed under state tort law or if they are preempted by federal authority over energy policy and interstate commerce.

The details

Boulder's lawsuit is the second climate lawsuit to survive a state supreme court ruling, after a case filed by Honolulu. The Supreme Court has outlined two key questions for the case: whether the court has jurisdiction before it works through the state court system, and whether federal law precludes the state-law claims seeking relief for harms caused by greenhouse gas emissions. Several previous climate cases have been dismissed on preemption grounds, but with Congress failing to set a national climate policy, environmental groups continue to pursue legal avenues at the state level.

  • In March 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the Colorado Supreme Court's ruling.
  • At the start of 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the Hawaii Supreme Court's decision allowing Honolulu's climate lawsuit to proceed.

The players

Suncor Energy Inc.

An energy company named as a defendant in Boulder's climate lawsuit.

County Commissioners of Boulder County

The plaintiffs in the climate lawsuit against Suncor Energy and Exxon.

Michael Williams

The Solicitor General of West Virginia, who argues these climate lawsuits engage global energy markets and interstate commerce, issues that must be decided at the federal level.

Michael Gerrard

A professor at Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for the Study of Climate Law, who notes that with Congress' failure to set a national climate policy, "the environmental community will continue to use whatever legal levers they have."

J.W. Verret

A legal analyst who suggests the past year demonstrated a "growing judicial momentum" that respected the federal preemption argument in climate litigation, even with conflicting conclusions in federal courts.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“If local and municipal lawsuits are allowed to use the courts in this way 'there's going to be a Balkanization of federal energy policy.'”

— Michael Williams, Solicitor General of West Virginia (natlawreview.com)

“With Congress' failure to set a national climate policy, 'the environmental community will continue to use whatever legal levers they have.'”

— Michael Gerrard, Professor, Columbia Law School's Sabin Center for the Study of Climate Law (natlawreview.com)

What’s next

The Supreme Court's decision in the Suncor Energy case could provide clarity on whether climate-related lawsuits can proceed under state tort law or if they are preempted by federal authority.

The takeaway

The Supreme Court's review of the Boulder climate lawsuit against energy firms could have far-reaching implications, determining whether municipalities across the country can use state courts to shape national climate policy in the absence of federal action.