A Pennsylvania court has dismissed a high-profile climate lawsuit filed by Bucks County against several oil companies and the American Petroleum Institute (API), dealing a setback to local governments seeking to hold fossil fuel firms financially responsible for climate-related damages.

Judge Stephen Corr of the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas issued the ruling on Friday, stating the case lacked subject matter jurisdiction. The dismissal was made with prejudice, meaning Bucks County cannot refile the lawsuit in state court.

The lawsuit, originally filed in March 2024, accused oil majors including BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Phillips 66, and Shell, as well as the API, of falsely marketing fossil fuels despite knowing their harmful effects on the climate. Bucks County argued that the companies' actions have worsened climate impacts and increased local costs related to infrastructure repair, flood control, and other public works.

Judge Corr disagreed with the oil industry’s claim that the court lacked personal jurisdiction or that the county lacked the capacity to sue. However, he ultimately ruled that the court could not hear the case because it dealt with a matter governed by federal law,  specifically, greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, which fall under the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Clean Air Act.

“Today we join a growing chorus of state and federal courts across the United States... in concluding that the claims raised by Bucks County are not judiciable by any state court in Pennsylvania,” Judge Corr wrote in the decision.

The judge also noted that while Bucks County framed the case around deceptive marketing practices, the complaint was ultimately “so intertwined with emissions” that it could not escape federal jurisdiction. Referring to a similar case brought by New York City that was also dismissed, Corr stated that “artful pleading” could not disguise the underlying issue: Global greenhouse gas emissions.

Read More: What is the Climate Bonds Initiative?

“While Bucks County does everything it can to avoid the issue of emissions, it cannot avoid the fact that if there were no emissions, there would be no damages,” Corr wrote.

Bucks County officials had stressed that the lawsuit was not an attempt to regulate emissions, but to recover the burgeoning costs of adapting to climate change. Commissioner Chair Diane Ellis-Marseglia said at the time of filing that the lawsuit was a tool to secure funds for local projects, such as retrofitting public buildings, upgrading stormwater systems, and replacing aging infrastructure.

The decision comes as part of a broader legal landscape where oil companies have encountered numerous climate-related lawsuits from U.S. cities and states. While some suits, like those from New Jersey and New York City, have been dismissed, others from Connecticut, California, and Honolulu have survived early legal challenges and continue to move forward.

Also Read: The Growing Need for ESG Companies, Sustainability, and Climate Solutions

The number of climate lawsuits filed globally has almost tripled since 2015, reflecting growing frustration with the lack of action concerning climate change. However, legal obstacles continue to limit how far these cases can go in state courts.

Looking ahead, the federal government’s stance on such cases could become more decisive. Although the Biden administration previously discouraged the Supreme Court from intervening in state-led climate suits, former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, under a Trump executive order, was instructed to take actions supporting oil companies in litigation. If those policies are revived or expanded, they could further shift the legal playing field in favor of fossil fuel producers.

For Bucks County, Friday’s decision marks a pause, if not an end, to its legal efforts against Big Oil in state court. Whether the county will appeal or explore other legal avenues remains unclear.

If you're curious to learn more, follow our Regulators News.

Source: WHYY