What do oil companies fear even more than cheaper and cleaner competition to their dirty fossil fuel business? A jury of American citizens.
In California and across the nation from Hawaii to Maine, a growing number of state and local governments are fighting in court to hold oil giants like Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell and BP accountable for their well-documented efforts to deceive the public about climate change and the “catastrophic events” and “more violent weather” their own scientists accurately predicted would result if the use of their fossil fuel products was not curbed. Like tobacco and opioid corporations, major oil and gas companies chose to lie about the harm of their products rather than warn the public about the threat. U.S. taxpayers are now on the hook for more than $1 trillion a year in damage caused by worsening fires, floods, droughts, storms and other climate disasters.
But as more courts rule that communities can present their case to a jury for why Big Oil should pay to clean up its mess, the fossil fuel industry and its allies are doing everything in their power to kill the cases and keep sticking the public with the bill.
In the Oval Office, the Supreme Court and the halls of Congress, fossil fuel interests are urging all three branches of government to help shield the companies from accountability and give Big Oil a get-out-of-jail-free card. Like attempts to immunize pesticide and AI companies, the calls to give Big Oil immunity should be loudly and vigorously opposed by all who agree that no corporation or person should be above the law. After Big Oil CEOs raised their fears about climate lawsuits during a private meeting with President Trump, the president ordered Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi to “take all appropriate action” to help the companies escape justice. The administration filed baseless lawsuits against two states and — in rare uninvited briefs — urged the Supreme Court and others to stop cases against the companies before they reach trial.
This week, after rightfully turning down five previous requests in three years, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Big Oil’s arguments to escape one of those cases — brought by the City and County of Boulder, Colo., where a deadly climate-fueled wildfire destroyed more than 1,000 homes. In granting Exxon Mobil’s petition, the justices signaled that they are unclear whether they even have the jurisdiction to consider the case before it is presented to a jury. Rather than simply take their chances in court, fossil fuel industry lobbyists and surrogates are going around judges entirely — urging members of Congress to pass legislation that could bar the courthouse doors for communities and give fossil fuel companies total legal immunity. The American Petroleum Institute, the largest oil and gas trade association, declared that protecting oil companies from “abusive state climate lawsuits” is one of its chief priorities and is lobbying on draft legislation.
Rep. Harriet Hageman (R-Wyo.) says she will introduce a bill to shield Big Oil from lawsuits after House Republicans unsuccessfully tried to block the District of Columbia from using its own consumer protection law “against oil and gas companies over environmental claims.” The bill is likely to resemble the “liability shield” for fossil fuel companies that a group of Republican attorneys general, many in the pocket of Big Oil, called for modeling after the disgraceful protections Congress gave gun manufacturers. A long-standing principle in our legal system has always been that if another party causes you harm, you have the right to take them to court and make your case for restitution. It’s one I helped people exercise for years as a trial attorney, representing victims of bad actors, dangerous products and discrimination in their efforts to secure justice. But now one of the most powerful and harmful corporate lobbies in history is hoping to rig the system so that legal accountability cannot apply to them.
California and other communities deserve their day in court to put these companies on trial and hold them accountable for the harm they’ve caused. Juries are a fundamental bastion of democracy, and it’s beyond dangerous to allow powerful and wealthy corporations to shield themselves from ever having to face jurors’ judgment. After all, if the fossil fuel industry is following the law, what does it have to fear in court?
Jay Inslee is a former governor of Washington and a consultant to the Center for Climate Integrity, which opposes immunity for Big Oil.
Insights
L.A. Times Insights delivers AI-generated analysis on Voices content to offer all points of view. Insights does not appear on any news articles.
Viewpoint
Perspectives
The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content.
Ideas expressed in the piece
-
Oil companies have deliberately deceived the public about climate change and the severe weather consequences their own scientists predicted would result from fossil fuel use[4], mirroring tactics employed by tobacco and opioid corporations[1].
-
Communities across the nation, including California and states from Hawaii to Maine, are pursuing lawsuits to hold major oil corporations accountable for climate damages, with taxpayers currently bearing over $1 trillion annually in costs from climate-related disasters[1].
-
The fossil fuel industry is actively blocking accountability through multiple channels, including direct appeals to the Trump administration, filings with the Supreme Court, and lobbying efforts in Congress to pass immunity legislation that would prevent communities from accessing the courts[1][3].
-
The American Petroleum Institute and congressional allies are pushing for legislation that would grant fossil fuel companies total legal immunity from climate liability lawsuits, similar to protections previously granted to gun manufacturers[1][3].
-
Juries represent a fundamental democratic institution, and allowing powerful corporations to shield themselves from judicial accountability undermines the principle that no entity should be above the law[4].
-
If fossil fuel companies are lawfully operating, they should not fear presenting their case before a jury and should welcome the opportunity to defend themselves in court[1].
Different views on the topic
-
Supporters of liability shield legislation argue the bills are necessary to protect energy producers from what they characterize as politically motivated litigation targeting lawfully operating companies that produce, manufacture, and sell a heavily regulated product functioning as designed[1].
-
Oil companies contend that climate liability cases aim to regulate emissions rather than address legitimate accountability concerns, arguing such litigation should be preempted by federal law[4].
-
Proponents of the bills note that Oklahoma and Utah are oil-producing states where the fossil fuel industry is economically significant, suggesting the legislation serves to protect a major economic sector[1][2].
