New Jersey to sue oil giants over climate change damages

‘All this while we rush to wean ourselves off the very products these companies have long known would fuel our pain but deceived New Jerseyans about, because keeping us addicted was better for their bottom line.’

As you’d imagine, attributing blame with something that feels so existential is no easy feat, but media investigations and liability studies have bolstered recent legal cases.

A 2021 study in the journal Nature, for instance, uncovered that $8bn of the $62bn damages incurred by Superstorm Sandy across state lines is directly linked to sea-level rise caused by climate change.

In the ongoing cases preceding New Jersey, oil companies have been attempting to take trials to federal court, which is generally considered to be more sympathetic to corporate defendants.

Thankfully, these attempts to gain an unfair advantage have thus far been ignored. In-fact, the ‘failure to warn’ approach from states falls nicely under the bracket of fraud, which helps to narrow legal disputes down to something genuinely tangible.

‘These suits serve only to divert attention and resources away from the collaborative, international efforts that are critical to developing a meaningful solution to climate change,’ argues Gibson Dunn and Crutcher attorney Theodore Boutrous, who represents Chevron.

The argument that agency was taken from the hands of the people is one that lawyers can work with. It’s undiplomatic to spread misinformation and prevent consumers from making their own choices, and that vital detail can be punished through official procedures.

In any case, as Yale professor Doug Kysar describes, it will be an ‘uncomfortable place for a court to be willing to pronounce that an entire governmental system was manipulated and defrauded by powerful actors.’

Any chance of finally getting some accountability will likely rely on this exactly this. So, for the first time, you could say there’s room for cautious optimism.