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 of the 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. These cases have ranged widely in purpose, scope, and ambition.

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. To date, no

High-profile, landmark cases such as Juliana v. United States have inspired a global trend of youth suing governments for failing to address climate change. Numerous other cases have sought to block fossil fuel projects, uphold greenhouse gas regulations, and force divestment from the fossil fuel industry.

Trends in U.S. Climate Litigation
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. These cases were mostly filed in state courts. Fossil fuel companies have pushed to have the cases moved to federal courts which they see as more favorable. 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 the numerous state and munipal suits against the carbon majors proceed.

Cases

 * Massachusetts v. EPA
 * Border Power Plant Working Group v. Department of Energy
 * Comer v. Murphy Oil
 * City of Oakland v. BP p.l.c.
 * Kivalina vs. Exxon
 * Juliana v. United States
 * Valve turners
 * Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Ward
 * Kain v. Department of Environmental Protection
 * WildEarth Guardians v. United States Bureau of Land Management
 * Baltimore v. BP
 * Harvard Climate Justice Coalition v. Harvard College
 * Beyond Pesticides v. ExxonMobil
 * Ramirez v. ExxonMobil
 * In re Exxon Mobil Corp. Derivative Litigation
 * New York v. ExxonMobil
 * Commonwealth v. ExxonMobil
 * Minnesota v. American Petroleum Institute
 * District of Columbia v. ExxonMobil
 * Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois
 * National Audubon Society v. Superior Court (Mono Lake decision)
 * Foster v. Washington Department of Ecology