Supreme Court Hands Win to Chevron, Big Oil in Environmental Damage Case

Julian Mark / The Washington Post
Supreme Court Hands Win to Chevron, Big Oil in Environmental Damage Case The decision puts into question a $745 million judgment against Chevron to help restore coastal wetlands in Louisiana that were damaged as long ago as World War II. (photo: Will Dunham/Reuters)

The decision puts into question a $745 million judgment against Chevron to help restore coastal wetlands in Louisiana that were damaged as long ago as World War II.

The Supreme Court on Friday sided with oil giant Chevron, ruling that it can fight an environmental damage lawsuit in federal court — a decision that could affect the outcomes of nearly a dozen other lawsuits that make similar allegations about the oil and gas industry.

The unanimous decision puts into question a $745 million state court judgment against Chevron to help restore coastal wetlands in Louisiana that were damaged as far back as World War II. Chevron had asked the Supreme Court to order the case moved to federal court.

At the heart of Chevron’s case was the argument that during World War II, the firm’s predecessors played a key role in the refinement of aviation gas, or avgas, to meet the demands of the war. Because the work was on behalf of U.S. government interests, the company and its backers have argued, claims regarding the actions at the time should be heard in a federal court rather than at the state level. The high court agreed.

“In this all-hands-on-deck, wartime context, Chevron needed to produce more crude oil as quickly as possible to facilitate more avgas refining, including its own,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority.

Chevron applauded the decision. “As the Court recognized, the plaintiffs’ claims are related to activities that Chevron and other energy companies performed under federal supervision during World War II,” company spokesman Bill Turenne said in a statement. “Those claims are flawed as a matter of both state law and federal law, and Chevron looks forward to litigating these cases in federal court, where they belong.”

Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. did not participate in the case. Shortly before arguments in January, he recused himself, citing financial interests in ConocoPhillips, the parent of Burlington Resources Oil … Gas, a party in a related case.

A NEW COMMENTING APP IS AVAILABLE FOR TESTING AND EVALUATION. Your feedback helps us decide. CLICK HERE TO VIEW.
Close

rsn / send to friend

form code