The US Supreme Court opens its new nine-month term on Monday with arguments in a high-stakes case that could decide whether state courts may hear lawsuits seeking to hold major oil companies accountable for the costs of climate change. The case, Suncor Energy v. the County Commissioners of Boulder County, pits local officials in Boulder, Colorado, against Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil.
Boulder is suing the two companies in state court, arguing they should pay a share of the costs that climate change has imposed on local taxpayers. Exxon and Canada-based Suncor contend that federal law bars state courts from hearing the lawsuit, a position that, if accepted, could shut down similar cases across the country.
The dispute is one of roughly 60 cases the court will hear during its term, with oral arguments running from Monday through late April. But the Boulder case carries unusual weight because it arrives as communities nationwide pursue their own claims against fossil fuel producers over damages tied to a warming climate.
At issue is whether federal law preempts state-court claims that seek compensation for climate-related harms. Boulder officials say the companies violated state law and should help cover the costs borne by residents. Suncor and Exxon argue that the matter belongs in federal court, or that federal law displaces the state claims entirely.
The court's ruling could reach well beyond Boulder. A decision favoring the oil companies would make it far harder for states, counties, and cities to press climate damage claims in their own courts. A ruling for Boulder would allow those cases to proceed, potentially exposing energy producers to a wave of litigation.
Boulder's suit names both Suncor, which operates a refinery in Commerce City, Colorado, and ExxonMobil. The city and county accuse the companies of breaking state laws, and they are seeking to force the firms to share in the costs of adapting to and recovering from climate impacts.
The case has drawn attention because it tests the boundary between federal and state authority over climate policy, an area where Congress has not enacted comprehensive legislation. If the justices find that federal law occupies the field, state and local governments could lose what many see as their most viable legal avenue for seeking climate-related compensation.
The Supreme Court's new term begins as the midterm elections approach, adding a political dimension to an already charged docket. The court is scheduled to hear arguments in about 60 cases between Monday and late April, covering a range of disputes beyond the climate question.
For Boulder County officials, the stakes are local and concrete: who pays for the damage a changing climate has already inflicted on roads, water systems, and other public infrastructure. For Exxon and Suncor, the case is a chance to stop a growing set of lawsuits before they reach the merits.
The justices' decision, expected after the arguments, will shape how — and where — climate accountability fights unfold in the years ahead.