WaPo Editorial Board: ‘The Supreme Court takes up climate change’ – Paper warns Colorado ‘case that has the potential to bankrupt every major oil and gas company if the justices don’t close the floodgates’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/10/04/suncor-v-boulder-is-about-federalism-much-climate-change/
Washington Post Editorial Board:
Colorado cannot be allowed to govern emissions in every other state.
Excerpt: The Supreme Court will start a new term Monday by hearing arguments in Suncor Energy v. Boulder County, a case that has the potential to bankrupt every major oil and gas company if the justices don’t close the floodgates.
The city and county of Boulder, Colorado, sued Suncor and ExxonMobil under a state law in 2018, arguing that their energy production released carbon emissions, which contributed to global climate change, which intensified weather-related harms, which created millions in local damages. The Colorado Supreme Court let these specious claims proceed.
Dozens of similar suits have subsequently been filed by localities across America, seeking billions in damages. A former member of the Boulder legal team, David Bookbinder, admitted last year that the goal of these cases is to impose a “carbon tax” through juries because Congress won’t pass one. If even a few suits succeed, “all these companies declare bankruptcy,” Bookbinder said. Too bad for anyone who drives a gas car or heats their home with fossil fuels.The Supreme Court will start a new term Monday by hearing arguments in Suncor Energy v. Boulder County, a case that has the potential to bankrupt every major oil and gas company if the justices don’t close the floodgates.
…
While Boulder’s theory of liability seems far-fetched, the issue before the court on Monday is different: whether federal law allows Colorado law to penalize companies for contributing to climate change. The decision could address a core question about federalism: To what extent can blue and red states impose their will on one another?
…
Boulder’s suit would allow Colorado to penalize a company for conduct outside of its borders. Every plant and refinery — and, for that matter, every car or cow that produces emissions — could theoretically be subject to the state law. As the dissent at the state Supreme Court put it, “That just can’t be right.”
The structure of the Constitution doesn’t allow this. When states ratified the founding document, they kept “all the rights of sovereignty which they before had” and which were not given to the federal government, as Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 32. How can Tennessee retain its sovereignty if Colorado is permitted to regulate its power plants? …
The justices may choose to punt the case back to lower courts on procedural grounds. That became more of a possibility after Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. recused himself last week.
…