Oakland v. BP

The cities of Oakland and San Francisco sued fossil fuel companies for knowingly causing climate change and threatening coastal California with accelerated sea level rise. The city asked the court to require the companies to funding a climate adaptation program to build sea walls and other infrastructure.

This case is one of the many examples of U.S. local governments suing the fossil fuel industry in pursuit of damages associated with the cost of adapting to climate change.

Background
In 2017, Oakland and San Francisco filed a public nuisance lawsuit against five oil and gas companies alleging that they had produced and promoted the use of massive amounts of fossil fuels despite having been aware since the 1950's that emissions from fossil fuels would cause severe and even catastrophic climate change.

The fossil fuel companies immediately sought to have the cases moved to federal court, a move which the local governments contested. In 2018, a Federal Court denied the local governments' motion to return the case to state court, resting upon the precedents of Kivalina v. ExxonMobil and American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut.

Somewhat unusually, on the same day it denied the local governments' motion to remand the case to state court, the Federal Court requested a "tutorial" on climate change. This tutorial took place in March 2018 with both sides presenting scientific evidence on the causes of global warming and its impacts on sea level rise.

Following the District Court's refusal to remand, the fossil fuel companies filed a motion to dismiss. In June 2018, the Federal District Court dismissed the lawsuit, ruling that following the precedent of Kivalina and American Electric Power Co., the issue of greenhouse gas emissions had been displaced by the Clean Air Act. San Francisco and Oakland appealed the dismissal along with the denial of remand.

On appeal, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled in favor of the California cities, and remanded the case to the District Court.

The fossil fuel companies have filed a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court.

Relevant Law and Principles

 * Public Nuisance
 * Clean Air Act

Ruling
As with other similar cases brought by local governments in California and across the United States, the case is currently awaiting a U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Baltimore v. BP case on whether state or federal court is the proper jurisdiction in which to hear the case.

Takeaways
One of the many local and state claims made against the fossil fuel industry. Like many of these cases, the matter currently awaits a U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Baltimore v. BP case.

Links

 * Sabin Center Database