Making Polluters Pay: an update on Minnesota’s pending case against Big Oil

Our Chief Legal Officer, Leigh Currie, was lead counsel on Minnesota’s ongoing lawsuit against Big Oil when she worked at the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office. She’s still tracking it closely in her role at MCEA. An important hearing on the case took place this month. Leigh weighed in to provide a breakdown of what you need to know. 

1. The gist of the lawsuit: Minnesota’s lawsuit was filed in 2020 against Exxon Mobil, American Petroleum Institute, and three Koch Industries. It alleges the companies intentionally deceived the public about fossil fuels’ role in causing the climate crisis in order to protect their business interests. Specifically, the complaint states that experts at the companies warned company leaders about the coming devastation of our planet, but company leaders did not share that information with the public or change course. Instead, they developed a decades-long campaign aimed at burying the information and confusing the public. Meanwhile, climate change advanced unchecked across the globe – leading to egregious and continuously unfolding harms – as the companies earned hundreds of millions in profit. 
2. Other states have filed similar lawsuits, including California, Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York and the District of Columbia. 
3. There was a hearing to dismiss the case at the Ramsey County District Court on Nov. 20th, where defendants argued the suit should be thrown out and the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office argued its claims should be heard. The court has 90 days to issue its decision. If the case is dismissed, the State will have an opportunity to appeal.
4. What’s on the line?  It’s a little different in each state. If Minnesota is successful, the oil companies would be required to release all their research on climate and invest the profits they made while actively deceiving the public into a “corrective education campaign” that would clearly explain the climate harms caused by burning fossil fuels. 

5. The potential end-game isn’t about money, though. It’s about holding the fossil fuel industry accountable for their role in exacerbating climate change. “A lot of times impact litigation like this against big powerful companies is the key to finally forcing change,” Currie said. 

   "That’s the power and potential of impact litigation. Think about Big Tobacco, the opioid lawsuits, and PFAS. These broad-reaching societal ills that we weren’t able to meaningfully move the needle on through other means finally started to shift through the courts.” 

   As the case advances, we will be keeping an extra close eye on the United States Congress, especially after the new federal administration takes office. There is always the possibility that Congress would grant some sort of immunity to fossil fuel companies for their role in causing, lying about, and exacerbating climate change. We do not want to see that happen. If it does, we’re prepared to shift strategies and find other avenues to push the fossil fuel industry to change its ways.