lawsuits
Companies face rising number of climate lawsuits
The number of climate lawsuits against corporations worldwide has surged, with over 230 cases filed since 2015, mostly after 2020.
In short:
- Climate-washing, where companies are accused of misleading environmental progress, saw 47 cases in 2023.
- The US led with 129 cases filed in 2023, followed by the UK with 24.
- New climate litigation cases emerged in Panama and Portugal in 2023, adding to the 55 countries recording such cases.
- A growing number of cases were filed in the global south.
Key quote:
"Climate litigation ... has become an undeniably significant trend in how stakeholders are seeking to advance climate action and accountability."
— Andy Raine, head of international environment law at the United Nations Environment Programme
Why this matters:
Increasing litigation pressures companies to get on board with climate goals, potentially changing corporate behaviors. The rise in climate-washing cases reflects growing scrutiny of environmental claims, which could lead to more honest and effective corporate climate actions.
Michigan to seek damages from oil companies for climate impacts
Michigan's Attorney General Dana Nessel is initiating a lawsuit against fossil fuel companies to recover losses due to climate change impacts, marking a significant legal move.
In short:
- Dana Nessel aims to hold oil companies financially accountable for their role in exacerbating climate change, which has affected Michigan's economy and lifestyle.
- The state plans to join other governments in litigation efforts, seeking to compensate for damages like severe weather and economic downturns.
- External legal teams are being solicited to support the extensive legal battle, with a potential to secure billions in damages.
Key quote:
"It’s long past time that we step up and hold the fossil fuel companies that are responsible for all these damages accountable."
— Dana Nessel, Michigan Attorney General
Why this matters:
This legal move mirrors a growing trend where states leverage the judicial system to address environmental and public health issues directly tied to climate change. By focusing on the fossil fuel industry, which has historically played a significant role in greenhouse gas emissions, Nessel aims to not only secure financial compensation for the state but also push for greater corporate accountability and transparency in environmental practices.
Also see:
- How the car and gas industry knew about the health risks of leaded fuel but sold it for 100 years anyway.
- Plaintiffs in the recently dismissed Held vs Montana argue: “We are entitled to a ‘clean and healthful’ environment. Montana’s policies are endangering that.”
Exploring the viability of suing oil companies for climate-related deaths
A new legal perspective raises the possibility of prosecuting oil companies for various types of homicide, excluding first-degree murder, due to their contributions to climate change.
In short:
- A recent Harvard Environmental Law Review article argues that fossil fuel companies could face homicide charges for knowingly contributing to lethal pollution.
- Legal experts and advocacy groups are discussing how traditional criminal law could adapt to address significant environmental harm caused by corporate actions.
- The concept of "climate homicide" is gaining traction, suggesting a shift from viewing harmful corporate behavior as merely costly to outright criminal.
Key quote:
"It’s supposed to be about protecting us from dangerous actors that would harm our communities. What if we actually use this system to protect us from dangerous corporate actors that are doing incomprehensible harm?"
— Aaron Regunberg, senior policy counsel at Public Citizen
Why this matters:
This approach uses legal frameworks traditionally applied to individual offenders and adapts them to corporate entities, potentially transforming how environmental damage is addressed legally and influencing corporate behavior toward greater public accountability.
What happens if the largest owner of oil and gas wells in the US goes bankrupt?
Scientists and academics navigate the challenging world of expert testimony
In a recent exploration by Science, Dan Charles delves into the intricate role of scientists serving as expert witnesses in legal disputes, highlighting both the opportunities and challenges this responsibility entails.
In short:
- Academics often find themselves in the complex role of expert witnesses in court, balancing the potential benefits against the risks of being perceived as biased or commercially motivated.
- The use of scientific expertise in legal battles, such as the recent case questioning acetaminophen's link to autism and ADHD, underscores the high stakes involved, including significant financial implications.
- While some researchers embrace the opportunity to apply their knowledge for justice, others are wary of the adversarial nature of courtrooms and the potential for professional and personal repercussions.
Key quote:
“It was absolutely an ethical responsibility."— Shanna Swan, epidemiologist at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and scientist at Environmental Health Sciences
Why this matters:
It's important to understand that testimony by scientists has real-world consequences for people's lives and health, not just for the litigants, but also for the scientists who often endure withering personal and professional attacks. WATCH: Investigative reporter talks about Bayer/Monsanto's efforts to discredit her work.
Iowa counties await decision on pipeline ordinances amid legal battles
Several Iowa counties face legal challenges over ordinances restricting carbon dioxide pipelines, with outcomes hinging on federal appeals.
In short:
- Shelby and Story counties' pipeline restrictions were overruled by a federal judge, sparking appeals.
- Summit Carbon Solutions sued five counties for imposing pipeline restrictions, citing disruption to their $8 billion pipeline project.
- The legal battles reflect local concerns about pipeline safety and environmental impacts.
Key quote:
"The challenged restrictions impose severe limitations that will lead to a situation where the (Iowa Utilities Board) may grant a permit to construct a pipeline and Summit is unable to do so."
— Chief Judge Stephanie Rose
Why this matters:
This legal conflict underscores the tension between local environmental safety concerns and large-scale industrial projects. The outcome could set a precedent for how local and federal authorities balance environmental protection with industrial development.
Source of pride and pollution: Balancing energy needs and community health.
Climate scientist triumphs in defamation lawsuit against bloggers
In a landmark case, climate scientist Michael Mann won more than $1 million in a defamation lawsuit against bloggers who falsely accused him of data manipulation.
In short:
- Michael Mann was awarded more than $1 million by a jury for defamation by bloggers who likened him to a convicted child molester.
- The verdict highlights the ongoing harassment faced by scientists in climate change, vaccine research, and other fields.
- Despite concerns about free speech, the case clarifies the legal boundaries of defamation in scientific debate.
Key quote:
“I hope this verdict sends a message that falsely attacking climate scientists is not protected speech.”
— Michael Mann, climate scientist.
Why this matters:
This victory is significant for the scientific community, emphasizing the importance of protecting researchers from unfounded and harmful allegations as well as ensuring that public discourse on vital issues like climate change remains informed and respectful.