Attorneys in the city of Charleston’s climate change lawsuit against two dozen oil and gas companies have until Tuesday to file proposed orders in the case, following a deadline extension granted by Circuit Court Judge Robert M. Young. The case centers on accusations that major energy firms concealed the environmental risks of fossil fuels for financial gain.
The lawsuit, filed in 2020, seeks financial damages to cover climate mitigation costs. At the core of Charleston’s claim is the assertion that oil companies knowingly misled the public about the environmental consequences of their products. During a two-day hearing in May, city attorneys argued that the fossil fuel industry suppressed critical information while shaping a market that limited consumer energy choices to fossil fuels.
Attorney Matt Edling argued that energy companies prioritized profits over transparency, stating that consumers typically base decisions on cost and convenience—not fuel source—due to limited options. Charleston’s legal team contends that the companies created this lack of alternatives.
In response, defense attorneys noted the city still relies on fossil fuels, demonstrating the ongoing practicality and affordability of conventional energy. They also emphasized that the case should be dismissed because emissions regulations fall under federal jurisdiction, not state courts.
Chevron’s counsel, Theodor J. Boutrous, cited a recent Pennsylvania case dismissed on similar grounds, noting that Charleston’s complaint focuses heavily on emissions—a federally governed issue—rather than specific allegations of fraud or deception.
Charleston’s legal team dismissed the Pennsylvania ruling as irrelevant and lacking substantive legal weight. Attorney Victor Sher argued it offered no new insight and should not influence the current proceedings.
Judge Young’s ruling remains pending as both sides prepare their final submissions, a decision that could set a precedent for future climate-related litigation against the fossil fuel industry.
