U.S. Supreme Court to hear anti-oil cases with energy costs on the line

By Andrew Rice
The Center Square

Energy advocates have been warning against green energy demands driving up prices across the country. As anti-oil and gas activists seek legal pathways to straddle the energy industry, U.S. companies are making less effective products at higher prices to comply with demands while customers suffer, industry insiders argue.

On Monday, justices in the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in Plaquemines Parish v. Chevron. The legal battle centers around whether Chevron can move a case to federal court when federal government contracts are involved.

Plaquemines Parish, in Louisiana, originally sought damages from multiple oil and gas companies for allegedly engaging in oil and gas production on the coast without securing proper permits or violating preexisting permits.

Some of the violations date back to the World War II-era, when the federal government had production contracts with energy companies now owned by Chevron. The parish argues these contracts did not detail the methods by which companies were to obtain the oil and gas, leaving them liable for violating state permitting laws.

Louisiana’s coastal parishes have filed more than 40 similar lawsuits, claiming that oil and gas companies are responsible for coastal land loss in Louisiana. As the first case to reach a jury, Plaquemines Parish won a verdict of $744.6 million in damages against Chevron, which appealed.

Jason Isaac, founder of the American Energy Institute, told The Center Square a Supreme Court ruling in favor of Plaquemines Parish could be “devastating” for American energy companies.

“It’s essentially a tax on energy,” Isaac said. “This could be bad for consumers, it could be really bad for American energy independence and American energy dominance.”

He said the case is an attempt to pin the loss of coastal wetlands and certain weather events to a particular company over a period of several decades.

“They’re trying to make the claim that they can go back and look at every single bit of emissions and attribute certain weather events to that,” Isaac said.

A separate case, Suncor Energy v. Boulder County Commissioners, has also caught the attention of the nation’s highest court. The case focuses on whether state and local governments can file public nuisance lawsuits against oil and gas companies for global climate change effects.

“Public nuisance can’t be used for global problems. It can be used for local problems,” O.H. Skinner, executive director of Alliance for Consumers, told The Center Square.

The U.S. Supreme Court distributed the case for its Dec. 12 conference but did not decide whether to deny it or pick it up. The court relisted the case for its Jan. 9 conference and may decide whether to take it on Monday.

Isaac said the only reason the high court is still considering another energy case is because lower courts have yet to hear its merits.

“Courts recognize that cities can’t use local lawsuits to control global climate policy or rewrite federal energy law,” Isaac said. “Boulder’s longevity reflects delay and avoidance, not legal strength.”

While not all are being heard before the Supreme Court, similar litigation against energy companies is occurring throughout the country. Wrongful death lawsuits, state nuisance laws and near-total plastic bans are seeing fierce litigation.

Isaac said the cases stem from political desires to affect lasting change in the U.S. energy industry. He said Democrat-backed organizations will offer to cover attorneys and legal fees in law firms across the country to pursue litigation against large energy companies.

“They’re essentially a private firm becoming a de-facto government agency going after legitimate businesses here in the United States,” Isaac said. “The implications of these cases are to the tunes of billions of dollars.

Some companies and independent producers have experienced uncertainty due to fears associated with energy procurement lawsuits. Isaac said American Energy Institute’s member companies have settled certain lawsuits to avoid expensive court proceedings.

“That increases the cost that gets passed on to the consumer in the end,” Isaac said.

Increased consumer prices lead to less effective appliances in the home, Skinner told The Center Square. As executive director of the Alliance for Consumers, he said rules imposed on manufacturers to be climate friendly results in a less effective product.

“If you keep telling somebody that they have to use less water, less heat, less electricity, things take longer and they don’t do as well,” Skinner said.

As climate litigation is pursued across the country, Isaac and Skinner said they are concerned about increasing regulations that straddle companies from making the most efficient product.

“I don’t think people are recognizing that they’re truly getting hammered with their electric utility bills because these companies and states continue to mandate so-called green energy,” Isaac said.