I’m sipping my coffee and reading about the latest Supreme Court case, and folks, I almost spilled my coffee reading this one. It seems that Justice Clarence Thomas, a stalwart conservative, might actually side with the city of Boulder, Colorado, in their climate change lawsuit against Exxon and Suncor. Now, I know what you’re thinking – Clarence Thomas, the conservative justice, siding with environmentalists? You can’t make this stuff up. But bear with me here, because it’s actually pretty interesting.
The case, Suncor Energy v. Boulder, is all about whether big oil can be held accountable by states and cities for planet-warming pollution. And Thomas, who has consistently sided against environmentalists in the past, might just surprise us all. That’s because he has a history of opposing federal environmental regulation, but also of being skeptical of letting federal law trump state law. It’s a bit of a paradox, but it’s what makes this case so fascinating.
Lawyers fighting Exxon quoted Thomas and his conservative colleague, Justice Neil Gorsuch, six times in written arguments filed with the justices over the summer. And a series of experts have filed friend-of-the-court briefs debating how Thomas will square the climate case with an opinion he wrote just five months ago rejecting the idea that federal interests could block a lawsuit filed under state law by an Army specialist severely injured in Afghanistan. It’s a bit of a head-scratcher, but it shows just how complex this case is.
The city of Boulder is seeking billions of dollars in damages for fires and floods they say were caused by rising temperatures. And they’re alleging that the oil companies not only contributed to those disasters but also misled the public about their role in climate change. It’s a big deal, folks, and the Supreme Court’s decision could have long-term sweeping implications for the oil and gas industry.
Now, I know some of you might be thinking, “But Big Elephant, what about Justice Samuel Alito recusing himself from the case?” Well, that’s a great question. Alito’s recusal does create the possibility of a 4-4 split, which would uphold the decision by Colorado’s Supreme Court that allowed Boulder’s lawsuit to proceed without setting a precedent. But it’s not just about the numbers, folks – it’s about the principles at play here.
Thomas and Gorsuch have both written opinions that firmly reject the idea that federal law can shove state law out of the way based on hazy arguments about a law’s intentions or policy consequences. And that’s what makes this case so interesting. Will they stick to their principles, or will they find a way to side with the oil companies? Only time will tell.
In the end, this case is all about the role of federal law in regulating climate change. And Thomas’ opinion, whatever it may be, will have significant implications for the oil and gas industry. So, let’s all just sit back, grab a cup of coffee, and enjoy the show. After all, as they say, “every vote counts” – and in this case, every opinion counts too. And who knows, maybe Thomas will surprise us all and become an unlikely hero for environmentalists. Stranger things have happened, right? 😊
Armchair patriot. Believes in the free market, cold beer, and that there’s always a guy named George behind every CNN segment.
Former remote-throwing champion turned #1 couch commentator on liberal panic in the media. Born in Texas (or so his mug says), he earned a degree in Fake Newsology & Beer Philosophy from YouTube University.
⚖️ ENTER THE LEGALIZER
Think the government has no idea what it's doing? Put your case before the Federal Case Terminal and find out.
