Michael Gerrard

gas endangerment finding last week will weaken that defense; whether it kills that defense remains to be seen.

courts, and it will be up to the state courts whether to put the cases on hold or let them proceed with discovery, further motions, and possibly trials.
A major defense the fossil fuel companies will raise is whether the state claims are preempted by federal law. EPA's revocation of the greenhouse

fuel companies over climate change.
The Supreme Court will hear arguments in the fall of 2026 and decide in late 2026 or early 2027. Meanwhile, the fossil fuel companies will probably ask that the two dozen or so other similar pending cases be put on hold. These cases are all in various state

international greenhouse gas emissions on global climate.
The first question is mostly about whether the appeal is too early, since there has not yet been a trial and state appeals from that. The second question, if answered in the affirmative, could preclude other cases seeking damages from fossil

proceed. The two questions on which the U.S. Supreme Court requested briefing are:
1. Whether this Court has statutory and Article III jurisdiction to hear this case.
2. Whether federal law precludes state-law claims seeking relief from injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate and

The U.S. Supreme Court just agreed to hear an appeal from Suncor and other fossil fuel companies in a lawsuit brought by the City and County of Boulder seeking money damages related to climate change and the companies' alleged deception. The Colorado Supreme Court had ruled that the case could 🧵

A coalition of public health and environmental groups has just filed a lawsuit against EPA in the DC Circuit court challenging revocation of the greenhouse gas endangerment finding. They are represented by some of the country's leading environmental litigators. aboutblaw.com/bkXr

812 Indonesia

653 Saudi Arabia

588 South Korea

580 Germany

Source: Source: IEA-EDGAR fossil CO2 emissions, edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/report_2025

it would be the fifth largest CO2 emitter in the world. Annual CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, 2024 (MMT):

13,124 China

4,632 United States

3,153 India

2.009 Russia

1,678 U.S. transportation

972 Japan

829 Iran

🧵

Trump's EPA said a major justification for revoking the GHG endangerment finding is that emissions from the U.S. transport sector (cars, trucks, etc.) are so low that reducing them wouldn't make any difference to the climate. But if this sector was a country, 🧵

Offshore wind showed up big during the East Coast’s brutal cold America’s two utility-scale offshore wind farms performed as well as gas power plants and better than coal in January — including during Winter Storm Fern.

South Fork Wind had a capacity factor of 52% last month - on par w/ NY state's most efficient gas plants

And Vineyard Wind had a 75% capacity factor during Winter Storm Fern

The data doesn't lie. #OffshoreWind works - especially during cold winter months

www.canarymedia.com/articles/off...

EPA isn't now denying that climate change is happening. Instead they are saying that whatever the U.S. does now will not make enough of a difference to warrant the expense to Americans.

The U.S. is historically the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and is abdicating its responsibility.

As soon as EPA does take this action, lawsuits in the D.C. Circuit will soon follow. They may ultimately go to the Supreme Court. My September article arrays the range of potential outcomes.

4. Would revocation of the endangerment finding take away the leading defense that the fossil fuel companies have in the numerous pending lawsuits against them by states and cities over climate change -- that since EPA can regulate GHGs, these actions are preempted?

2. Will the courts find, contrary to the Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, that EPA does not have the power to regulate GHGs?

3. Will EPA adequately respond to the thousands of comments it received on its draft rule?

National Academies Publish New Report Reviewing Evidence for Greenhouse Gas Emissions and U.S. Climate, Health, and Welfare A new National Academies report reviews evidence gathered by the scientific community since 2009 on greenhouse gas emissions and their effects on U.S. climate, health, and welfare.

1. Will EPA contest the science of climate change, relying on the report by five climate contrarians that has been discredited by the National Academies of Sciences, bit.ly/4aFW7uy, and others, written by a committee that the federal court held was improperly formed, bit.ly/4qofhd5 ?

The press is reporting that EPA is about to withdraw the endangerment finding, the legal basis for EPA regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. As I wrote in September, bit.ly/401lLUw, this would raise a tangle of legal issues. Among them: 🧵

Trump’s EPA to Scrap Landmark Emissions Policy in Major Rollback The US Environmental Protection Agency plans this week to repeal a policy that provides the legal foundation for a raft of rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions, marking President Donald Trump’s m...

From late last night: The EPA plans this week to repeal a policy that provides the legal foundation for a raft of rules regulating greenhouse gas emissions, marking Trump’s most consequential retreat from the fight against climate change.

Gift link @bloomberg.com: www.bloomberg.com/news/article...

Michigan Sues Oil and Gas Companies for Sabotaging Renewable Energy and Electric Vehicles The suit claims there was a vast conspiracy to maximize profits despite driving a climate crisis

"Renewable energy is central to the fight against climate change, and this suit alleges that the companies have stood squarely in the way. Michigan has opened up a whole new battleground in the climate fight" said climate law expert @michaelgerrard.bsky.social

www.sierraclub.org/sierra/michi...

Memorandum Opinion and Order – #50 in American Sustainable Business Council v. Hegar (W.D. Tex., 1:24-cv-01010) – CourtListener.com Memorandum Opinion and Order

companies for all manner of protected expression concerning fossil fuels."

The case is American Sustainable Business Council v. Hegar. The decision is by Judge Alan Albright (who was named to be bench by President Trump in 2018) of the U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas. bit.ly/4qlN3Qq

Memorandum Opinion and Order – #50 in American Sustainable Business Council v. Hegar (W.D. Tex., 1:24-cv-01010) – CourtListener.com Memorandum Opinion and Order

A federal court just invalidated the Texas law that prohibits state entities from investing in or contracting with companies that boycott fossil fuels. The court found that the law violates the First Amendment by being both overbroad and unconstitutionally vague, and "permits the State to penalize

⚖️🌏 🗣️ Call for #Presentations
The Sabin Center & @climate.columbia.edu invite submissions for the Attribution Science & Climate Law Conference, June 10–11, 2026 at Columbia Law School in NYC. Learn more➡️
climate.law.columbia.edu/content/seco...

⚖️A Dutch court ordered the Netherlands to protect a Caribbean island from #climatechange.

The Sabin Center’s Dr. Maria Antonia Tigre (@matigre.bsky.social) notes in an interview with @nytimes.com that “there’s a very clear state responsibility now” following the decision.

🔗 buff.ly/d0oabJU

📜 On January 26, we filed an amici brief in Renew Northeast v. US DOI, in support of plaintiffs who are challenging a number of anti-renewables federal actions that implicate wind and solar projects on rural private lands. 🍃 ☀️

Read the brief ➡️ buff.ly/vpSirJ6

The decision of the Hague District Court (you can toggle to English version): bit.ly/4bvMCiJ

and states are required to protect particular places or address particular kinds of impacts. It also shows that some domestic courts, which have the power to issue binding orders, will pick up the guidance of international tribunals and turn them into more concrete actions.

a detailed adaptation plan to be implemented within four years. The case was brought by eight residents of Bonaire and Greenpeace Netherlands.

This decision is a foretaste of more cases to come, where the general obligations of states are made more specific,

It's highly vulnerable to sea level rise, extreme heat, storms, and flooding The court found the government had discriminated against Bonaire's residents in failing to treat them the same way as residents of the European Netherlands. The court ordered the government to draft

Important new climate decision: A court in The Hague ruled today that the Dutch government violated European Convention on Human Rights in failing to take sufficient action to protect the residents of Bonaire, an island off the coast of Venezuela that's a special municipality of the Netherlands. 🧵

⚖️🌏💻Next Monday, February 2, the Sabin Center is hosting a #webinar, in which leading legal scholars and practitioners will explore the evolving landscape of #climatelitigation across #Asia. @matigre.bsky.social will deliver opening remarks.
Info ➡️ buff.ly/JkAYwvA
Register ➡️ buff.ly/CJ8sW10