Supreme Court to hear Boulder climate case as states expand EPA lawsuits

Coalition notifies EPA of intent to sue over gas-fired power plant emissions

The US Supreme Court is set to hear a landmark climate case Monday — the first day of its new term — in which the city and county of Boulder, Colorado, are suing oil and gas companies to force them to help pay for damage caused by climate-linked disasters. The case is part of a wave of climate-change litigation with billions of dollars at stake.

The Boulder hearing comes as a separate 21-state coalition, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, expanded its legal fight against the Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday. The coalition notified the agency of its intent to sue over its failure to regulate emissions from many gas-fired power plants, broadening the legal action. The same day, the coalition filed suit in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia challenging the EPA’s repeal of greenhouse gas emissions limits for power plants fueled by coal and natural gas.

The 21-state coalition also includes Pennsylvania’s governor, the District of Columbia, New York City, Chicago, and the city and county of Denver, along with Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin.

In announcing the lawsuit, the coalition argued that “gutting one of the country’s most significant climate protections” will “set the nation back decades and worsen the climate crisis.”

James said the federal government is showing “callous disregard” for Americans’ health and the environment, and that future generations will pay the price. “Dismantling these protections is a betrayal of American families, and the stakes are too high to allow this administration to once again put profits over people,” James said in a statement Thursday.

The lawsuit alleges the EPA “unlawfully abandoned” the pollution limits “without properly considering reasonable alternatives or the enormous health and climate costs of allowing more pollution into the atmosphere.” Power plants that burn fossil fuels are a major source of planet-warming pollution.

The EPA on Thursday declined to comment on the pending litigation. In announcing the repeal last month, the agency said it would save the industry more than $300 billion in costs and help “unleash” American energy. EPA Assistant Administrator Aaron Szabo said in September that the rule change will allow utilities to “make the best decision for the ratepayers based on cost and cost savings, instead of being required to shut down facilities.”

The EPA announced last month that it was revoking the Biden-era rule, and said it was taking a separate but related step to prevent future administrations from regulating climate pollution from power plants. The separate rule proposed last month could prevent future administrations from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from power plants; the agency has said it expects to finalize the proposal next year. That proposal follows the agency’s earlier move this year revoking the scientific finding that had long served as the central basis for US action to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change.

The power-plant rule, first proposed last year, represents a fundamental shift from efforts by the Obama and Biden administrations to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. Environmental groups say the change will come at a cost to Americans’ health and further degrade the environment.

In the Boulder case before the Supreme Court, the city and county are suing oil and gas companies to force them to help pay for damage caused by disasters linked to climate change.