Washington, D.C. — Phil Goldberg, Special Counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, issued the following statement addressing the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals’ misguided ruling directing Minnesota’s climate lawsuit to proceed in state court.

“The Eighth Circuit’s ruling, along with Judge Stras’s concurrence, underscores the importance of Supreme Court review and why the nature of climate change, this litigation, and the remedies they seek are all beyond the scope of any state law claim.  The ruling points out that, although a public nuisance claim was not in this lawsuit, it is the basis for most of the climate cases and “creates a stronger case for federal jurisdiction.” Then, Judge Stras got to the heart of why these cases need Supreme Court review. He said there is no denying that this lawsuit is a clear “attempt to set national energy policy,” that Minnesota “seeks a global remedy for a global issue,” and that “This is, in effect, an interstate dispute.” We agree with Judge Stras that the court’s rules should not operate “in such a confounding way” as to deny removal on this important federal issue and that “the Supreme Court gets to make that call.”