Today, a handful of cities and counties went before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in an attempt to revive the failing climate litigation campaign. In its curtain-raising story for the hearings, the Los Angeles Times called on reporter Susanne Rust to set the stage for its readers, without disclosing that she led the Rockefeller-funded reporting project that manufactured the original “Exxon Knew” controversy and led to today’s hearing.
The municipalities are arguing that these cases belong in state court, when in fact – according to U.S. District Court Judge William Alsup – they have no place in the judiciary at all.
In dismissing San Francisco and Oakland’s case in 2018, Alsup explained:
“The problem deserves a solution on a more vast scale than can be supplied by a district judge or jury in a public nuisance case. While it remains true that our federal courts have authority to fashion common law remedies for claims based on global warming, courts must also respect and defer to the other co-equal branches of government when the problem at hand clearly deserves a solution best addressed by those branches. The Court will stay its hand in favor of solutions by the legislative and executive branches. For the reasons stated, defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED.” (emphasis added)
The two cases up for appeal have the potential to either shut down the climate litigation campaign once and for all or open the door for other cities to file frivolous litigation against America’s energy producers.
Read More at EIDClimate.org
This post appeared first on Energy In Depth.