WASHINGTON, DC – Following oral argument at the Supreme Court this morning in Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, a case in which the Supreme Court is considering whether oil and gas companies that caused significant economic harm to Colorado residents by exacerbating global warming can be held accountable under Colorado law, Constitutional Accountability Center Deputy Chief Counsel Brian Frazelle issued the following reaction:

This morning’s oral argument highlighted just how slippery an argument the fossil fuel industry is presenting to the Supreme Court to avoid paying for the harms its illegal conduct has caused in Colorado. As observers have noted, the companies’ position is essentially a result in search of a rationale.

Even some conservative Justices—whose rulings have overwhelmingly favored corporate interests and curtailed the ability of injured people to seek redress in court—questioned the counsel for the oil and gas companies about the vague boundaries of their position and its lack of clear grounding in precedent.

While the Justices also robustly questioned the counsel for the Colorado plaintiffs, particularly about the practical implications of allowing suits like this to proceed, those questions did not undermine the plaintiffs’ case. As Chief Justice Roberts noted, states have long remedied harms that their residents experience within the state, even when the conduct causing those harms occurred beyond state borders. The energy companies nevertheless argue that businesses can’t be held accountable in state court for actions contributing to global warming and other forms of interstate air pollution, even if those actions were illegal and resulted in concrete harms within that state. But neither the Constitution nor the Court’s precedent establishes any such rule, as our amicus brief to the Court demonstrates.