Supreme Court climate case could impact Hawaii lawsuits
More than 30 lawsuits have been brought by state and local governments seeking to hold energy companies liable for alleged climate-related harms. On Monday, October 5, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case that could determine the future for many of them.
The lawsuit, Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, is being appealed to the Supreme Court by the City and County of Boulder, Colorado, after unfavorable lower-court rulings.
Boulder’s case is one the many climate lawsuits filed against energy companies by state and local governments, including in Hawaii.
Amy Howe, Founder and Reporter at SCOTUSBlog, calls this “The most important case of the term”, explaining, “this actually is a huge culture war case. There are 60 or so of these climate change cases pending across the country. So, it's like the business docket case and the culture war case.”
In 2018, Boulder County and the City of Boulder sued Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil under Colorado law, alleging that the companies contributed to alleged local ‘climate-related’ harms while misleading the public about the risks associated with fossil fuel use. The companies dispute the claims and argue that lawsuits seeking damages for harms attributed to global greenhouse-gas emissions raise issues governed by federal law.
A central legal conflict amongst lower-court rulings is how these cases should be characterized.
The Colorado and Hawaii Supreme Courts accepted the plaintiffs’ arguments that these lawsuits are not attempts to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, concluding that these cases present conventional exercises of state authority over corporate conduct and can proceed under state law.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected this characterization in New York City’s climate case, stating, “artful pleading cannot transform the City’s complaint into anything other than a suit over global greenhouse gas emissions” which the U.S. Supreme Court has said is reserved for the Federal government.
Rockefeller-funded groups have been involved in developing the litigation strategy, identifying potential plaintiffs, developing research to support the litigation, and establishing a campaign to support the litigation.
Individuals involved with the litigation have agreed that the campaign is a way to regulate greenhouse gas emissions by raising energy prices. An attorney who worked for years on behalf of Boulder called this type of lawsuit “an indirect carbon tax.”
Already, several climate lawsuits across the country have been paused, pending the SCOTUS decision.
Most recently, the Maryland Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of three similar climate lawsuits, saying that the U.S. Supreme Court would benefit from a perspective that is different from the high courts in Hawaii and Colorado.
The case has attracted significant national attention, with more than 60 amicus briefs filed on both sides.
---30---
BACKGROUND:
SCOTUS: Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, No. 25-170 Oral argument: Monday, October 5, 2026 | 10 a.m.
The Energy Sector Is Threatened by a Climate Litigation Free-for-All -- Donald J. Kochan, George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School | National Review | September 20, 2026
“These are the principles that the U.S. Supreme Court will guard if it reverses the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision in Suncor, which has allowed state tort suits with extraterritorial reach. If the Court does not do so, it will endorse a tort system in which every domestic and foreign company can be sued in or by every state as well as every one of the thousands of subunits within states, like the County of Boulder. Such a multiplicity of lawsuits would cripple commerce, paralyzing energy producers by subjecting them to dozens of conflicting, jury-driven liability standards for the same global conduct. That would not only be grossly unfair and lead to inconsistent and arbitrary judgments. Such a litigation free-for-all would harm energy consumers, too.”
The Supreme Court must rein in Colorado’s climate lawfare -- Ilya Shapiro, Manhattan Institute | Washington Post | June 8, 2026
State Courts Can’t Run Foreign Policy -- John Yoo, UC Berkeley Law, and Michael Toth, Civitas Institute | WSJ | February 24, 2026
Regulation Without Borders: A Single State Attempts to Dictate Energy Policy Nationwide -- J. Matthew Rice, Solicitor General of Tennessee | National Review | May 21, 2026