Washington, D.C. — Phil Goldberg, Special Counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, issued the following statement in response to the Anne Arundel County, Maryland filing a lawsuit against manufacturers over the impacts of climate change:

“We share Anne Arundel County’s commitment to the environment, and we should be fighting climate change instead of each other. What Americans deserve is a smart national climate policy from policymakers, not a trial-lawyer driven litigation campaign that is more about making money and political scapegoating than real change. These lawsuits do nothing to advance meaningful solutions to climate change and will only make oil, gas and other energy staples more expensive for families and businesses in Anne Arundel County and throughout Maryland.

“Making and selling us the energy we all need to heat our homes, power our factories and jobs, and be part of modern society is not a liability-inducing event. That is why courts across the country—including the U.S. Supreme Court—have repeatedly dismissed these climate suits. If Anne Arundel County wants to make a real difference in the fight against global climate change, it should focus on working with manufacturers to foster the policies and innovations required to address this challenge—as the overwhelming majority of communities have done. Americans are tired of the litigation sideshow and deserve real solutions.”

-MAP-

The Manufacturers’ Accountability Project (MAP) will set the record straight and highlight the concerted, coordinated campaign being waged by plaintiffs’ lawyers, public officials, deep-pocketed foundations and other activists who have sought to undermine and weaken manufacturers in the United States. This campaign will pull back the curtain to expose these efforts and to hold key actors accountable in order to protect our members and American manufacturing workers. The MAP is a project of the NAM’s Manufacturers’ Center for Legal Action (MCLA), which serves as the leading voice of manufacturers in the nation’s courts. Visit us at mfgaccountabilityproject.org.

Washington, D.C. — Phil Goldberg, Special Counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, issued the following statement in response to the New York City’s new lawsuit against manufacturers over the impacts of climate change:

“On Earth Day, we should be coming together to solve climate change. Manufacturers, including in the energy sector, are proactively working to create a sustainable environment, which requires developing innovative new technologies that will allow us to source and use energy much more efficiently. Collaboration and innovation are the only ways to stop climate change in its tracks.

“New York City should stop wasting everyone’s time on litigation that seeks to impose legal liability on manufacturers for climate change. This litigation will do nothing to solve climate change, is needlessly divisive, and will only make it more expensive for New York families and businesses to power their homes and workplaces. It also has repeatedly failed. Just last month, the federal courts rejected the City’s last climate lawsuit against these same companies, saying that “global warming presents a uniquely international problem of national concern. It is therefore not well-suited to the application of state law.”

“Americans deserve a smart national climate policy from policymakers, not a trial-lawyer driven litigation campaign that is more about making money and political scapegoating than real change. If New York City wants to make a real difference in the fight against global climate change, it should focus on working with manufacturers to foster the policies and innovations required to address this challenge—as the overwhelming majority of communities have done. Americans are tired of the litigation sideshow and deserve real solutions.”

Washington, D.C. — Phil Goldberg, Special Counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, issued the following statement in response to the County of Maui, Hawai’i filing a lawsuit against manufacturers over the impacts of climate change:

“Maui’s lawsuit does nothing to advance meaningful solutions to climate change and will only make oil, gas and other energy staples more expensive for the community’s families and businesses. Filing a bunch of these lawsuits is a political strategy by a handful of environmental advocates trying to scapegoat energy manufacturers when, in reality, fighting climate change is a global challenge that requires collaboration and innovation to overcome. Manufacturers, including those in the energy industry, are focused on the fight against climate change every day and are investing major resources in developing ways to source and use energy more efficiently.

“These politically-motivated lawsuits over climate change have no place in the courtroom, which is why every court to reach the substance of the allegations has dismissed them—including the U.S. Supreme Court. Just last year, a judge in New York called similar allegations ‘hyperbolic’ in dismissing a lawsuit there. Making and selling us the energy we all need to be part of modern society is not a liability-inducing event. If Maui wanted to make a real difference in the fight against global climate change, it would focus on working with manufacturers to foster the policies and innovations required to address this challenge—as the overwhelming majority of communities have done—and not join this fringe litigation movement.”

-MAP-

The Manufacturers’ Accountability Project (MAP) will set the record straight and highlight the concerted, coordinated campaign being waged by plaintiffs’ lawyers, public officials, deep-pocketed foundations and other activists who have sought to undermine and weaken manufacturers in the United States. This campaign will pull back the curtain to expose these efforts and to hold key actors accountable in order to protect our members and American manufacturing workers. The MAP is a project of the NAM’s Manufacturers’ Center for Legal Action (MCLA), which serves as the leading voice of manufacturers in the nation’s courts. Visit us at mfgaccountabilityproject.org.

Today the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project released its full Beyond the Courtroom: Climate Tort Litigation in the United States report, which details the well-funded, tightly-scripted groups of activists, private law firms, public relations groups and academics behind the sophisticated campaign to influence municipalities and others’ decisions to bring climate tort litigation against energy manufacturers. It is clear from the report that this litigation is not about solving climate change, but is driven solely by politics and profit.

The report’s release comes at a timely juncture, as the U.S. Supreme Court said on Friday that it would review a key issue in Baltimore’s climate change case – an issue related to federal jurisdiction that is common to all of the climate cases. Accordingly, there will likely be a pause in the climate tort litigation covered by this report, providing an opportunity for reporters and others following these cases to learn more about the litigation campaign.

As the report explains, this litigation is part of a nearly 20-year campaign by these groups, and so far every court, including the U.S. Supreme Court, to consider their substantive merits has rejected them. The report exposes the true nature and purpose of this litigation: filing a bunch of these lawsuits is nothing more than a political strategy to scapegoat energy manufacturers rather than acknowledge that fighting climate change must be a shared global challenge that requires collaboration and innovation to overcome. Indeed, these lawsuits do nothing to advance meaningful solutions and will only make the energy American families and business use every day more expensive.

Nevertheless, private attorneys and other climate litigation campaign activists have been traveling to municipalities and states, offering their services on a contingency fee basis—effectively “selling” these lawsuits.

“Although private plaintiffs’ attorneys have tried to shop these lawsuits from Florida to California, the courts have continued to appreciate that this kind of litigation will not solve climate change, nor are the courts the appropriate venue for creating policies to address a pressing global issue,” said Phil Goldberg, special counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project. “This report is a helpful tool in understanding the political interests that influence climate lawsuits as well as the flawed legal arguments the plaintiffs are using in court.”

The report is divided into six chapters:

• In the first chapter, MAP introduces the key players in the climate tort litigation campaign—the municipalities, organizations and attorneys suing energy manufacturers. It also peeks behind the curtain to the non-profits and donors that are providing financial contributions, as well as legal and communications support, to the litigation.
• Chapter Two takes a close look at the groups and individuals funding, coordinating and supporting this litigation campaign.
• Chapter Three examines the “highly coordinated” organizations, public relations firms and “media outlets” that “iterate the same talking points” to amplify the climate litigation campaign.
• Chapter Four reveals how lawyers have been actively selling baseless litigation over climate change, telling local governments that they and their funders will pay for the litigation in its entirety in exchange for a contingency fee if the litigation is successful. The chapter then details how two legal teams and their partisans have been pitching local governments.
• In Chapter Five, MAP explains the private funding models, namely foundation money and contingency fee arrangements, behind today’s government climate lawsuits. The chapter explains how these funding sources can distort justice and create conflicts of interest between the for-profit lawyers and the communities they purport to represent.
• Chapter Six explores major contradictions upon which the climate litigation campaign is built, underscoring the fundamental weaknesses in its legal claims.

Although the report focuses on litigation targeting energy manufacturers, its explanation of public nuisance theory is helpful in understanding a concerning trend in the United States of punishing manufacturers for engaging in lawful behavior and for creating the products that consumers need. 

The full report can be accessed online.

-MAP-

The Manufacturers’ Accountability Project (MAP) will set the record straight and highlight the concerted, coordinated campaign being waged by plaintiffs’ lawyers, public officials, deep-pocketed foundations and other activists who have sought to undermine and weaken manufacturers in the United States. This campaign will pull back the curtain to expose these efforts and to hold key actors accountable in order to protect our members and American manufacturing workers. The MAP is a project of the NAM’s Manufacturers’ Center for Legal Action (MCLA), which serves as the leading voice of manufacturers in the nation’s courts. Visit us at mfgaccountabilityproject.org.

Washington, D.C. — Phil Goldberg, Special Counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, issued the following statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court granting review in the climate litigation filed by the City of Baltimore against energy manufacturers:

“In granting review in the Baltimore climate change case, the Supreme Court clearly understands the need for the federal judiciary to speak with a single voice on whether this climate case and the others like it should be heard in state or federal court. As we explained to the Supreme Court in the amicus brief I filed for the manufacturing community urging the Court to take this case, the lawyers bringing these climate cases have been trying to game the system by filing the same case in several jurisdictions—hoping to take advantage of a split among the circuits on the question at the heart of this appeal. There is no doubt the recent increase in filings in new jurisdictions likely added urgency to this appeal in the mind of the Supreme Court.

At the end of the day, we are confident the Court will once again find that climate change requires a comprehensive response from policymakers, not a liability ruling from state or federal courts. The Supreme Court said climate change was not a tort litigation issue in AEP v. Connecticut and it should say so again here. Fighting climate change is a shared global challenge that requires collaboration and innovation—not litigation—to overcome.”

-MAP-

The Manufacturers’ Accountability Project (MAP) will set the record straight and highlight the concerted, coordinated campaign being waged by plaintiffs’ lawyers, public officials, deep-pocketed foundations and other activists who have sought to undermine and weaken manufacturers in the United States. This campaign will pull back the curtain to expose these efforts and to hold key actors accountable in order to protect our members and American manufacturing workers. The MAP is a project of the NAM’s Manufacturers’ Center for Legal Action (MCLA), which serves as the leading voice of manufacturers in the nation’s courts. Visit us at mfgaccountabilityproject.org.

Washington, D.C. — Phil Goldberg, Special Counsel for the Manufacturers’ Accountability Project, issued the following statement in response to the Connecticut attorney general filing a lawsuit against manufacturers over the impacts of climate change:

“We value General Tong’s commitment to the environment, but we should be fighting climate change instead of each other. Filing a bunch of these lawsuits is a political strategy by environmental advocates trying to scapegoat energy manufacturers when, in reality, fighting climate change is a shared global challenge that requires collaboration and innovation to overcome. These lawsuits do nothing to advance meaningful solutions and will only make oil, gas and other energy staples more expensive for Connecticut families and businesses.

“Regardless of how the lawsuits are packaged, making and selling us the energy we all need to be part of modern society is not a liability-inducing event. This is why every court to reach the substance of the allegations has dismissed them—including the U.S. Supreme Court. Just last year, a judge in New York called similar allegations ‘hyperbolic’. A patchwork of decisions from state courts cannot substitute for a national energy policy crafted by the executive and legislative branches.

“The truth is that manufacturers, including energy manufacturers, are focused on the fight against climate change every day and are investing major resources in developing ways to source and use energy more efficiently. If Connecticut and other states want to make a real difference in the fight against global climate change, they should work with manufacturers to foster the policies and innovations required to address this challenge—as the overwhelming majority of communities have done—and not join this ill-conceived litigation.”

-MAP-

The Manufacturers’ Accountability Project (MAP) will set the record straight and highlight the concerted, coordinated campaign being waged by plaintiffs’ lawyers, public officials, deep-pocketed foundations and other activists who have sought to undermine and weaken manufacturers in the United States. This campaign will pull back the curtain to expose these efforts and to hold key actors accountable in order to protect our members and American manufacturing workers. The MAP is a project of the NAM’s Manufacturers’ Center for Legal Action (MCLA), which serves as the leading voice of manufacturers in the nation’s courts. Visit us at mfgaccountabilityproject.org.