United States

The United States has the largest share of historical greenhouse gas emissions of any country, contributing about 25% of historical emissions since the industrial revolution. Today, the United States is the world's second largest emitter behind China, though on a per capita basis its emissions remain higher than China, Europe, and most OECD countries.

The United States has also seen the largest share of climate litigation cases brought to date. According to the United Nations Environment Programme and the Sabin Center for Climate Change, as of July 2020, 1,200 of the 1,550 climate change cases had been filed in the United States.

Despite the number of cases, the United States does not have as favorable a legal framework for climate change litigation as many other countries. It's constitution contains no Right to a Healthy Environment or strong Public Trust Doctrine language. A wave of litigation brought against fossil fuel corporations primarily on nuisance grounds beginning in the early 2000's was largely unsuccessful. High profile cases such as Juliana v. United States and Kivalina v. ExxonMobil have struggled with the issue of standing, a common obstacle to climate litigation.

Nevertheless, climate litigation in the United States has had a significant impact, both on the country's greenhouse gas emissions and on inspiring other litigation around the globe. Juliana v. United States inspired a global trend of youth suing governments for failing to address climate change. Massachusetts v. EPA established that the United States Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions as a pollutant, which allowed for greenhouse gas regulations to be put in place under the Obama Administration. Lawsuits such as have also been successful at delaying and blocking fossil fuel projects in the United States.

Legal Framework for Climate Litigation in the United States
As of July 2020, approximately 50 percent of the 1,200 climate litigation cases in the United States have been brought under just three laws, the Clean Air Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Endangered Species Act.

US States and Municipalities v. Carbon Majors
In the last few years numerous American states and municipalities have brought suits against fossil fuel companies seeking damages for their increased infrastructure costs of adapting to rising seas, more powerful storms, and other impacts of climate change. Earlier precedent set by American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut had found that common law claims cannot be pursued under federal law, so these cases were mostly filed in state courts under state law. In turn, the fossil fuel companies as defendants in the cases have pushed to have the cases moved to federal courts which they see as more favorable. None of these cases has yet to reach a decision on the merits. In January 2021, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether a case brought by the City of Baltimore should proceed in state or federal court. The outcome of the case is likely to determine how at least 24 other state and municipal suits against the carbon majors proceed.

Fraud Cases Against Exxon
Investigations into a trove of internal Exxon documents in 2015 showed that the company knew that the burning of fossil fuels was warming the planet far earlier than they publicly acknowledged. Worse, this insider knowledge occurred well before fossil fuel companies engaged in a coordinated public relations and lobbying campaign to sow doubt about the existence of global warming.

The attorneys general of New York, Massachusetts, and the U.S. Virgin Islands launched investigations against Exxon in 2015 and 2016. Although the U.S. Virgin Islands ultimately ended their investigation, New York and Massachusetts moved forward with lawsuits against Exxon claiming that the company had deceived investors by misleading them about climate risk caused by Exxon's products. In late 2019, the New York case went to trial. Ultimately the judge cleared Exxon of the investor fraud allegations, but wrote, "nothing in this opinion is intended to absolve Exxon from responsibility for contributing to climate change.” The Massachusetts case has yet to proceed to trial as of March 2021.

Shareholders have also brought cases against Exxon accusing the company of fraud. Two such cases are pending in U.S. Federal Court in Texas.

Public Trust Cases
The wave of Youth v. Gov cases began in the United States in 2015 with Juliana v. United States. Since then, similar cases alleging that governments have violated the public trust doctrine and human rights of young people by failing to act on climate change have appeared in several U.S. states and numerous countries. The cases have succeeded in generating public attention but thus far have been less successful in the courtroom. Juliana was dismissed by a U.S. Appellate Court in January 2020. Several of the state level cases have also been dismissed.

Important Environmental Law Precedents

 * Massachusetts v. EPA (EPA Regulatory Authority over GHG)
 * Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois (Public Trust Doctrine)
 * National Audubon Society v. Superior Court (Mono Lake decision) (Public Trust Doctrine)
 * Border Power Plant Working Group v. Department of Energy (Greenhouse gas emissions must be considered in Environmental Assessments)
 * American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut (Clean Air Act displaced federal common law on the issue of greenhouse gas emissions)
 * National Resource Defense Council v. Wheeler

State & Municipal Cases Against Fossil Fuel - Cost of Adaptation

 * City of Oakland v. BP p.l.c.
 * Baltimore v. BP
 * Minnesota v. American Petroleum Institute
 * County of San Mateo v. Chevron Corp.
 * King County v. BP p.l.c.
 * Rhode Island v. Chevron Corp.
 * Boulder County v. Suncor Energy Inc.
 * City of Hoboken v. ExxonMobil Corp.
 * Delaware v. BP
 * Annapolis v. BP

Fraud Cases Against ExxonMobil

 * Ramirez v. ExxonMobil
 * In re Exxon Mobil Corp. Derivative Litigation
 * New York v. ExxonMobil
 * Commonwealth v. ExxonMobil
 * District of Columbia v. ExxonMobil

Private Suits Seeking Damages from Fossil Fuel Companies

 * Comer v. Murphy Oil
 * Kivalina vs. Exxon
 * Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, Inc. v. Chevron Corp.

Cases to Block Fossil Fuel Projects

 * WildEarth Guardians v. United States Bureau of Land Management
 * Montana Environmental Information Center v. U.S. Office of Surface Mining

Public Trust Cases Against Government

 * Foster v. Washington Department of Ecology
 * Juliana v. United States
 * Kain v. Department of Environmental Protection
 * Aji P. v. State of Washington

Other Human Rights Cases

 * Rights of Indigenous People in Addressing Climate-Forced Displacement

Divestment, Disclosure, and Fiduciary Duty Cases

 * Harvard Climate Justice Coalition v. Harvard College
 * Lynn v. Peabody Energy Corp.

False Advertising Against Fossil Fuel Companies

 * Beyond Pesticides v. ExxonMobil
 * Complaint against Chevron filed with FTC

Defense of Climate Protesters

 * Valve turners
 * Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Ward

Resources

 * Sabin Center Database

Organizations

 * AIDA
 * Earthjustice
 * Earthworks
 * Global Witness
 * Greenpeace USA
 * Natural Resources Defense Council
 * Our Children's Trust
 * Richman Law & Policy - Corporate Greenwashing
 * Sierra Club