The biggest challenge to climate litigation against energy producers to date is now fully briefed and awaiting a decision from the U.S. Supreme Court on whether the lawsuit can move forward. 

Reminder: in May, nineteen Republican state attorneys general asked the high court to block climate lawsuits brought by California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey and Rhode Island, arguing that the cases raise “grave constitutional problems” as they would “affect energy and fuel consumption and production across the country.” 

As E&E News reports, the high court’s review is not a guarantee: 

“While only the Supreme Court can handle legal battles between states, the justices do not have to take up the case. The justices must first grant the states’ motion for leave to file a bill of complaint.” 

The attorneys general’s reply brief, filed last Wednesday, reinforced why SCOTUS should grant the motion:  

“The Court should hear the claims of 19 States that allege imminent threats to their sovereignty and to their basic way of life. States should not be left to wait and see what a judicially imposed ‘transition to alternative energy sources’ might entail. … The longer Defendants exercise such power, the greater the risks of severe harm to the energy industry, higher prices across the country, and lasting damage to every major sector of the economy for which energy is a crucial input.

“… 19 States do not lightly invoke this Court’s original jurisdiction; they do so because the threats are real, the constitutional violations are serious, and, having surrendered to this Court the power to settle their controversies, they have no other option.” (Emphasis added)

Read the full post at EIDClimate.org.

The post Attorneys General Urge SCOTUS to Allow a Challenge to Blue-State Climate Lawsuits: We “Have No Other Option” appeared first on .

This post appeared first on Energy In Depth.