The setup
The Supreme Court kicks off its new term this Monday, and they’re starting with some heavy-duty drama. The city and county of Boulder, Colorado, have been trying to make Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy pay up for the climate-related chaos hitting their backyard—think extreme heat, wildfires, and ecosystem destruction. They filed a lawsuit back in 2018, arguing the companies knew what they were doing with those greenhouse gases and need to foot the bill.
The legal vibes
The oil companies are highkey trying to get this moved out of state court. They argue that climate change is a global issue, not something that should be handled by a patchwork of different state laws. They’re warning that if Boulder wins, we’ll see every city and county in the U.S. trying to sue over emissions, which would be an absolute mess. The Trump administration is siding with the oil companies here, saying this whole legal strategy is just an end-run around actual federal and international climate policy.
Who’s in the room?
Justice Samuel Alito is sitting this one out. He didn’t give a reason, but it’s giving potential conflict of interest since his 2025 filings show he holds stock in ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66. With him out, we’re looking at an eight-justice bench. If they end up with a 4-4 split, the previous decision by the Colorado Supreme Court—which allowed Boulder to keep moving forward—will stay in place.
Why it matters
This isn't about deciding if the companies are 'guilty' yet, it's just about where these cases get to be heard. If the Supreme Court shuts this down, it closes the door for a massive wave of climate litigation. If they let it stand, the plot thickens for energy companies everywhere. It’s a major stress test for how the U.S. legal system handles global issues that feel like a local crisis.
