Judge Dismisses Exxon's Defamation Suit Against Environmentalists

But the case against California's attorney general can proceed in Texas federal court.

Published on Feb. 24, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A federal judge in Texas has dismissed Exxon Mobil's defamation lawsuit against environmental groups that accused them of trying to sabotage its recycling business in collusion with an Australian mining magnate. However, the judge allowed a parallel case against California Attorney General Rob Bonta to proceed.

Why it matters

The case highlights the ongoing tensions between fossil fuel companies, environmental groups, and government regulators over issues of plastic pollution, recycling, and corporate accountability. The dismissal of the lawsuit against the environmental groups raises questions about the legal limits on public criticism of corporate practices, while the case against the state attorney general could set precedents around the free speech rights of public officials.

The details

The dispute began in 2024 when Bonta filed a lawsuit against Exxon, alleging the company had engaged in a 'decades-long campaign of deception' that contributed to the global plastics-pollution crisis. Exxon then filed a countersuit claiming Bonta and the nonprofits were acting at the behest of Australian mining magnate Andrew Forrest, a business competitor. The judge dismissed the case against the nonprofits, finding they had insufficient connection to Texas, but allowed the case against Bonta to proceed, ruling that his campaign fundraising email was not protected by official immunity.

  • In the fall of 2024, California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit against Exxon.
  • Three months later, in early 2025, Exxon filed a countersuit against Bonta and the nonprofits.
  • The judge held a hearing on Exxon's countersuit in Beaumont, Texas in August 2025.
  • On February 13, 2026, the judge issued his decision dismissing the case against the nonprofits but allowing the case against Bonta to proceed.

The players

Rob Bonta

The Attorney General of California who filed a lawsuit against Exxon alleging the company had engaged in a 'decades-long campaign of deception' that contributed to the global plastics-pollution crisis.

Andrew Forrest

An Australian mining magnate who is the founder of Fortescue Metals Group. Exxon accused Forrest of having a business grudge against the company and of orchestrating the environmental groups' lawsuit against Exxon.

Exxon Mobil

The oil and gas company that filed a defamation lawsuit against environmental groups and the California Attorney General over their criticism of Exxon's plastic recycling program.

Baykeeper

An environmental group in San Francisco that was dismissed from Exxon's countersuit but said it would continue to pursue its California lawsuit against the company.

Sierra Club

An environmental group based in Oakland that was named in Exxon's countersuit but said they were pleased by the dismissal of the case.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We will continue to speak freely about our litigation and hold Exxon accountable, as protected by the First Amendment and California law.”

— Sejal Choksi-Chugh, Executive Director, Baykeeper (nytimes.com)

“The cases by the nonprofits and Mr. Bonta against Exxon in California would bring 'much needed transparency' to questions about recycling as plastic waste 'continues to choke our landfills, rivers and oceans.' He called Exxon's countersuit 'an attempt to silence scrutiny rather than answer it.'”

— Andrew Forrest (nytimes.com)

“We refuse to let others attack our reputation and technology for their financial and political gain.”

— Liza Steger, Spokeswoman, Exxon (nytimes.com)

What’s next

The California Attorney General's office has filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit regarding the case that can proceed against Bonta.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing tensions between fossil fuel companies, environmental groups, and government regulators over issues of plastic pollution, recycling, and corporate accountability. The dismissal of the lawsuit against the environmental groups raises questions about the legal limits on public criticism of corporate practices, while the case against the state attorney general could set precedents around the free speech rights of public officials.