Oil companies defeat New York City appeal over global warming

[GURPS]

It rejected the city's efforts to sue under state nuisance law for damages caused by the companies' "admittedly legal" production and sale of fossil fuels, and said the city's federal common law claims were displaced by the federal Clean Air Act.

"Global warming presents a uniquely international problem of national concern," Circuit Judge Richard Sullivan wrote for a three-judge panel. "It is therefore not well-suited to the application of state law."

Sullivan added that while the Clean Air Act did not address emissions from outside the country, foreign policy concerns and the risk of courts "stepping on the toes of the political branches" barred the city's lawsuit.

Nick Paolucci, a spokesman for New York's law department, said the city was disappointed it could not hold the oil companies "accountable for the environmental damage they knew their products would cause."

Thursday's decision "explains in clear detail why the U.S. climate tort lawsuits are meritless," Chevron General Counsel Hewitt Pate said. "Working with the new U.S. administration, other governments, and other honest stakeholders on constructive global solutions is a better path."

https://news.yahoo.com/oil-companies-defeat-york-city-135250159.html

 

[GURPS]

Greenies' 2007 Court Victory Comes Back to Bite Them in 2021


“The Second Circuit decision in City of New York v. Chevron et al. is rich with irony. As it turns out, climate activists and Democrat states preempted New York City’s lawsuit against Big Oil by convincing SCOTUS 14 years ago to allow EPA to regulate greenhouse gases in Massachusetts v. EPA,” Steve Milloy, a former Trump-Pence EPA transition member and founder of JunkScience.com, said in a statement.

“Climate activists have since tried to take down Big Oil with the #ExxonKnew campaign. Looks like the #ActivistLawyersShouldHaveKnown that the political question of regulating greenhouse gases has already been decided,” Milloy quipped.

Indeed, the Second Circuit cited Massachusetts v. EPA (2007) multiple times in ruling against New York. In his ruling, Judge Richard Sullivan noted that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “was established in 1970 to implement programs to regulation pollution from both mobile and stationary sources under the Clean Air Act and other related statutes, … a role which was later interpreted to include the regulation of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, see Massachusetts v. EPA.”

“Global warming presents a uniquely international problem of national concern,” Sullivan wrote. “It is therefore not well-suited to the application of state law.”