In a major win for climate activists, the US Supreme Court has cleared the way for the state of Hawaii to sue oil and gas companies.

The city of Honolulu, Hawaii, sued oil and gas companies for contributing to climate change, saying the misled the public “nearly half a century.

Defendants, major corporate members of the fossil fuel industry, have known for nearly half a century that unrestricted production and use of their fossil fuel products create greenhouse gas pollution that warms the planet and changes our climate. They have known for decades that those impacts could be catastrophic and that only a narrow window existed to take action before the consequences would be irreversible. They have nevertheless engaged in a coordinated, multi-front effort to conceal and deny their own knowledge of those threats, discredit the growing body of publicly available scientific evidence, and persistently create doubt in the minds of customers, consumers, regulators, the media, journalists, teachers, and the public about the reality and consequences of the impacts of their fossil fuel pollution.

At the same time, Defendants have promoted and profited from a massive increase in the extraction and consumption of oil, coal, and natural gas, which has in turn caused an enormous, foreseeable, and avoidable increase in global greenhouse gas pollution and a concordant increase in the concentration of greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide (“CO2”) and methane, in the Earth’s atmosphere. Those disruptions of the Earth’s otherwise balanced carbon cycle have substantially contributed to a wide range of dire climate-related effects, including but not limited to global atmospheric and ocean warming, ocean acidification, melting polar ice caps and glaciers, more extreme and volatile weather, drought, and sea level rise.

Honolulu’s lawsuit accuses the companies of hiding the true impact of fossil fuels and promising a false narrative.

Defendants have known for more than 50 years that greenhouse gas pollution from their fossil fuel products would have a significant adverse impact on the Earth’s climate and sea levels. Defendants’ awareness of the negative implications of their actions corresponds almost exactly with the Great Acceleration and with skyrocketing greenhouse gas emissions. With that knowledge, Defendants took steps to protect their own assets from those threats through immense internal investment in research, infrastructure improvements, and plans to exploit new opportunities in a warming world.

Instead of warning of those known consequences from the intended and foreseeable uses of their products and working to minimize the damage associated with the use and combustion of such products, Defendants concealed the dangers, promoted false and misleading information, sought to undermine public support for greenhouse gas regulation, and engaged in massive campaigns to promote the ever-increasing use of their products at ever greater volumes. All Defendants’ actions in concealing the dangers of, promoting false and misleading information about, and engaging in massive campaigns to promote increasing use of their fossil fuel products has contributed substantially to the buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere that drives global warming and its physical, environmental, and socioeconomic consequences, including those on the City.

As a direct and proximate consequence of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, the average sea level will rise substantially along the City’s coastline, causing flooding, erosion, and beach loss; extreme weather, including hurricanes and tropical storms, “rain bomb” events, drought, heatwaves, and other phenomena will become more frequent, longer-lasting, and more severe; ocean warming and acidification will reduce fish catch and injure or kill coral reefs that protect the island from increasingly intense storm surges; freshwater supplies will become increasingly scarce; endemic species will lose habitat, while invasive and disease carrying-pest species will thrive; and the cascading social, economic, and other consequences of those environmental changes—all due to anthropogenic global warming—will increase in the City.

The lawsuit goes on to describe the challenges Honolulu, as well as the island of Oʻahu, will face. Among them are an faster rate of rising temperatures and heat waves, which is leading to invasive species, additional stress on native wildlife and plant life, increased electricity demand, increased wildfires, and new pathogen threats.

Because of its oceanside location, Honolulu is especially vulnerable to a rise in sea levels.

The City is already experiencing sea level rise and associated impacts, and will experience significant additional sea level rise over the coming decades through at least the end of the century. The City is particularly vulnerable to the impacts of sea level rise because of its substantial developed coastline and substantial low-lying areas, particularly along the south coast of Oʻahu. The figure below delineates the City’s sea level rise exposure area, a State of Hawaiʻi-recognized sea level rise vulnerability zone that the City is using to formulate sea level rise adaptation strategies. More than $19 billion in assets and 38 miles of roads are located within the Seal Level Rise Exposure area and are at risk of damage or destruction due to sea level rise estimated to occur by the year 2100, including but not limited to freshwater supply pipelines that are subject to higher levels of corrosion due to saltwater intrusion; and wastewater infrastructure, such as armoring the wastewater outfall and elevating water treatment infrastructure at the Sand Island Wastewater Treatment Plant that will cost hundreds of millions to retrofit against rising seas and coastal erosion, as well as eroded wastewater pipelines and related infrastructure along the highway in Waiʻanae that will cost additional millions of dollars to armor. High tide flooding in the City has substantially increased since the 1960s. The City is has already lost 25% of its beaches to the erosive force of rising seas, the increased frequency and power of storm surges, and aggravated wave run-up and impacts, and those losses continue to mount. Native Hawaiian cultural sites, built structures, natural resources, infrastructure including roads, sewerage, and beach parks, and other resources are more frequently flooded and, in some cases, inundated. As sea level continues to rise, low-lying, populated coastal communities such as Waialua will experience increased frequency and severity of flooding ultimately leading to permanent inundation and making some areas of the coast impassable or uninhabitable. Even if all carbon emissions were to cease immediately, the City would continue to experience sea level rise due to the “locked in” greenhouse gases already emitted and the lag time between emissions and sea level rise.

SCOTUS Clears the Way

According to CBS News, a group of 15 energy companies had asked SCOTUS to reverse a decision by the Hawaii Supreme Court that allowed the case to proceed.

The companies had initially tried to have the case moved to federal court, arguing that federal law and the Clean Air Act superseded state authority. The Hawaii Supreme Court shot down the companies’ argument, saying the case could proceed.

“Plaintiffs’ state tort law claims do not seek to regulate emissions, and there is thus no ‘actual conflict’ between Hawaii tort law and the [Clean Air Act],” the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled. “These claims potentially regulate marketing conduct while the CAA regulates pollution.”

By refusing to hear the energy companies’ case, SCOTUS ultimately upheld the Hawaii Supreme Court’s decision, allowing the case to proceed.

The decision is the latest setback for the energy sector, adding to a growing list of legal cases being brought against companies in an attempt to hold them responsible for their role in the current climate crisis. If these cases continue to gain traction, the day may come when the court losses necessitate changing the status quo.