Join the Center for Progressive Reform on Wednesday, September 30 at 12 noon Eastern for a webinar, “Oral Arguments in Suncor v. Boulder: What to Expect, What to Look For.”
The first oral argument scheduled for the U.S. Supreme Court’s next term is Suncor v. Boulder. This case arises from the oil and gas industry’s attempt to use novel theories of federal preemption to block state and local governments from holding them accountable in court for their decades-long campaign to conceal the harms of their products.
During this webinar, a panel of legal experts will review and evaluate the competing legal arguments raised in the case, anticipate how individual justices might approach the arguments, and discuss other features they will be watching out for as the oral arguments play out.
Our Speakers
Alejandro Camacho, Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law, and Center for Progressive Reform Board Member and Member Scholar
Rachel Rothschild, Assistant Professor, University of Michigan Law School, and Center for Progressive Reform Member Scholar
Daniel Farber, Sho Sato Professor of Law and Director of the California Center for Law, Energy and the Environment, University of California, Berkeley School of Law, and Center for Progressive Reform Member Scholar
James Goodwin, Policy Director, Center for Progressive Reform (Moderator)
Related Resources
Case History and Materials
- Sabin Center for Climate Change Law Climate Litigation Database
- Amicus brief by Member Scholar William Buzbee
- Amicus brief by Member Scholars Daniel Farber, Thomas McGarity, Nina Mendelson, and Wendy Wagner (and additional co-authors), filed as “Preemption Scholars”
Commentaries
- Member Scholar Rebecca Bratspies in the New Orleans Times-Picayune/Advocate: “Despite Chevron ruling, state courts still open for climate suits”
- Member Scholar Maxine Burkett in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser: “Hawaii takes another legal step toward climate justice”
- Member Scholars Alejandro Camacho and Robert Glicksman in The Conversation: “The U.S. Constitution and laws do not protect oil companies from being sued over the harm they cause to the climate” and the University of Chicago Law Review Online (forthcoming): “The Polluter-Pays Principle and its Enemies: Corporate Fraud, Weaponizing Preemption, and the Survival of Climate Accountability“
- Senior Policy Analyst Bryan Dunning in CPRBlog: “The Costs of Climate Change Are Rising. Shielding the Oil and Gas Industry from Accountability Is a Terrible Idea.”
- Policy Director James Goodwin and Member Scholar Thomas McGarity in Law360: “At High Court, Oil Cos.’ Suncor Preemption Claims Fall Short”
- Policy Director James Goodwin in CPRBlog: “Using ‘National Security’ Excuse to Preempt State and Local Efforts to Hold Big Oil Accountable Would Be Bad Law and Policy” and “Debunking the Argument about Oil and Gas Litigation and Increased Energy Costs”
- Sidney Shapiro in The Regulatory Review: “Regulatory Capture and Fossil Fuel Attempts to Preempt Tort Suits”
- Member Scholar Rob Verchick in The Hill: “Climate accountability deserves its day in court”
