Share

Lead Case

The Goats Have a Start Date. The Supreme Court Doesn't.

By Seth D. Carrington— July 31, 2026

Feature image for article: The Goats Have a Start Date. The Supreme Court Doesn't.

The Supreme Court will decide whether Boulder can bill the oil companies for a changed climate. When, nobody will say. The goats hired to eat the fuel along the city's west edge went to work in June, on a schedule, like people who have jobs.

In between sits a city budget officer who spent part of last year going department to department through her own government to learn what Boulder spends on not burning down, and came back with six and a half million dollars nobody had counted. And a county road that wants a bigger culvert for four hundred thousand. The pipe holds no view on federal preemption.

Lead Case

The Goats Have a Start Date. The Supreme Court Doesn't.

The Supreme Court will decide whether Boulder can bill the oil companies for a changed climate. When, nobody will say. The goats hired to eat the fuel along the city's west edge went to work in June, on a schedule, like people who have jobs.

In between sits a city budget officer who spent part of last year going department to department through her own government to learn what Boulder spends on not burning down, and came back with six and a half million dollars nobody had counted. And a county road that wants a bigger culvert for four hundred thousand. The pipe holds no view on federal preemption.

Seth D. Carrington

Former merchant seaman and labor journalist who spent decades watching working communities navigate crises while elites offered empty promises. Writes with dark humor about the gap between climate rhetoric and lived reality.

Counter-Ruling

Maryland's Highest Court Told Baltimore to Keep the Bill

On a July afternoon in McElderry Park, the row houses east of downtown sit several degrees hotter than the leafier blocks a few miles west. Baltimore pays for that gap out of its own budget: cooling centers, ambulance runs, pumps for the intersections that flood after every hard storm.

In 2018 the city sued 26 oil and gas companies to move part of the bill. The claim was deception. The companies knew what burning their product would do, and sold it for decades without saying so. On March 24, nearly eight years later, Maryland's highest court dismissed the case.

It turned on a question settled before any evidence was heard: what is this lawsuit really about? The majority held that no amount of "creative pleading" could disguise an attempt to regulate emissions worldwide, something only the federal government may do. Justice Killough dissented. The companies "were not sued because of what they emitted. They were sued over what they concealed."

Hawaii and Colorado read it the dissent's way. The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whose reading holds. The costs, meanwhile, stay with the city that already paid them.

Counter-Ruling

Maryland's Highest Court Told Baltimore to Keep the Bill

On a July afternoon in McElderry Park, the row houses east of downtown sit several degrees hotter than the leafier blocks a few miles west. Baltimore pays for that gap out of its own budget: cooling centers, ambulance runs, pumps for the intersections that flood after every hard storm.

In 2018 the city sued 26 oil and gas companies to move part of the bill. The claim was deception. The companies knew what burning their product would do, and sold it for decades without saying so. On March 24, nearly eight years later, Maryland's highest court dismissed the case.

It turned on a question settled before any evidence was heard: what is this lawsuit really about? The majority held that no amount of "creative pleading" could disguise an attempt to regulate emissions worldwide, something only the federal government may do. Justice Killough dissented. The companies "were not sued because of what they emitted. They were sued over what they concealed."

Hawaii and Colorado read it the dissent's way. The U.S. Supreme Court will decide whose reading holds. The costs, meanwhile, stay with the city that already paid them.

TAKE NOTE

Same claims, opposite answers — the split now before the U.S. Supreme Court

Court	Ruling
Hawaii (2023)	Proceeds. Claims target deceptive marketing, not emissions.
Colorado (2025)	Proceeds. Same reasoning; appealed to U.S. Supreme Court.
Maryland (Mar. 2026)	Dismissed. Emissions regulation in disguise; federal law controls.
2nd Circuit (2021)	Dismissed. "Artful pleading" can't change what a claim is.

Two extra hurdles Maryland added, independent of federal law:

Maryland has never let a government recover money damages for public nuisance — only stop harmful conduct.
Trespass requires control over the thing that invaded your property. Rain and storms don't qualify.

What that means: even if the U.S. Supreme Court rejects the federal-law argument, Maryland's cities still have nowhere to bring the claim.

Case Tracker

More than 30 climate liability lawsuits are pending across the United States. Not one has resulted in a plaintiff collecting a dollar. The cases range from municipal tort claims and state attorney general suits to a legislative superfund statute and a novel class action blaming oil companies for rising insurance premiums. Collectively, the jurisdictions bringing them are home to more than one in four Americans.

Every one of these cases now exists in the shadow of the Supreme Court's upcoming Suncor v. Boulder decision, which could determine whether state courts can hear climate claims at all. A parallel legislative threat, the Stop Climate Shakedowns Act, would dismiss pending cases outright. Below: the active cases beyond Boulder and Maryland, where they stand, and what the plaintiffs say they need the money for.

Case Tracker

More than 30 climate liability lawsuits are pending across the United States. Not one has resulted in a plaintiff collecting a dollar. The cases range from municipal tort claims and state attorney general suits to a legislative superfund statute and a novel class action blaming oil companies for rising insurance premiums. Collectively, the jurisdictions bringing them are home to more than one in four Americans.

Every one of these cases now exists in the shadow of the Supreme Court's upcoming Suncor v. Boulder decision, which could determine whether state courts can hear climate claims at all. A parallel legislative threat, the Stop Climate Shakedowns Act, would dismiss pending cases outright. Below: the active cases beyond Boulder and Maryland, where they stand, and what the plaintiffs say they need the money for.

Municipal Tort

Chicago Wins State Court, Targets $200M in Upgrades

The Seventh Circuit sent Chicago's climate deception suit back to Cook County in July 2026, rejecting oil companies' push for federal court. The city wants nearly $200 million for infrastructure protecting vulnerable neighborhoods from intensifying storms. Defendants now want the case frozen until the Supreme Court rules in Suncor.

Municipal Tort

Honolulu Nears Discovery After Four Supreme Court Rejections

Honolulu's suit against 17 energy companies has survived four separate Supreme Court challenges and is now approaching discovery in Hawaii state court. The city wants compensation for sea-level-rise adaptation costs from companies that sold oil across the islands without disclosing known climate risks.

Municipal Tort

Multnomah County Seeks $51.5 Billion After Deadly Heat

Oregon's most populous county is suing 17 fossil fuel companies over the 2021 heat dome that killed 69 people. The numbers are staggering: $50 million for past damages, $1.5 billion for future climate costs, $50 billion for healthcare and infrastructure. The case is moving through Portland circuit court.

State AG

Minnesota Enters Discovery, Demands Internal Industry Documents

After the Minnesota Supreme Court refused to hear defendants' appeal, the state's consumer-protection suit against ExxonMobil, Koch, and API has crossed into discovery. Internal company documents about what the industry knew, and when, are now subject to production. The complaint cites billions in statewide climate costs.

State AG

Hawaii Survives Federal Attempt to Kill State Suit

A federal judge dismissed the Trump administration's preemptive lawsuit to block Hawaii's climate claims, though the ruling was later modified to "without prejudice," leaving room for another federal challenge. Hawaii's state-court suit alleging negligence, nuisance, and failure to warn proceeds. The DOJ says it is "exploring all options."

Antitrust Theory

Michigan Alleges Big Oil Operated as Anticompetitive Cartel

Michigan's January 2026 suit takes a different tack: it alleges ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, and API conspired to suppress clean energy competition, violating state and federal antitrust law. The Trump DOJ tried to intervene; a federal court found the government lacked standing. The case moves forward.

Superfund Statute

Vermont's Climate Superfund Law Awaits Court Ruling

Vermont's Climate Superfund Act would bill fossil fuel companies for their proportional share of state adaptation costs from 1995 to 2024, funding flood mitigation after catastrophic 2023 flooding. Industry groups, a state coalition led by West Virginia, and the Trump administration all filed challenges. Oral argument concluded in March; a ruling is pending.

Insurance Premiums

Homeowner Class Action Links Oil Deception to Premiums

The first private class action tying oil company deception to rising insurance costs. Richard Kennedy of Normandy Park, Washington, watched his premiums jump from $1,012 to $2,149 since 2017. Statewide, rates climbed 51 percent in six years. The federal RICO suit covers all homeowners with policies purchased after 2017 nationwide.

Further Reading

The "Climate-Debt Doom Loop" Threatening Municipal BudgetsA peer-reviewed study names the cycle where disaster costs trigger bond downgrades, which raise borrowing costs for rebuilding.

A Federal Bill Would Kill Every State Climate Lawsuit at OnceThe Stop Climate Shakedowns Act lays bare the fossil fuel industry's legislative play against state-level liability claims.

Quick links

Climate Litigation Has Reached 62 Countries. The U.S. Is Ground Zero.

The Pending Fate of Climate Superfund Statutes

Municipalities Own Most Infrastructure but Can't Afford to Protect It

After the LA Fires, Municipal Bonds Face Their Climate Reckoning

Funding Mechanisms

Your community is adapting to climate change right now, whether or not anyone calls it that. Somebody is paying for it. The question worth asking is how, and who actually bears the cost.

The answer is almost never a single budget line. It's a tangle of property taxes, utility fees, federal grants, state programs, bonds, and insurance proceeds, each covering only a fraction of the actual need. These mechanisms also interact in ways that compound the problem: climate damage erodes property values, which shrinks tax revenue, which weakens creditworthiness, which raises borrowing costs. Insurance retreat destabilizes the property markets that fund everything else.

The gap between what these tools provide and what adaptation costs doesn't show up on any municipal ledger. It shows up as the skipped culvert replacement, the patched HVAC, the inspection pushed to next fiscal year. Here are the eight mechanisms your community likely relies on, what they actually deliver, and where the cost lands.

Funding Mechanisms

Your community is adapting to climate change right now, whether or not anyone calls it that. Somebody is paying for it. The question worth asking is how, and who actually bears the cost.

The answer is almost never a single budget line. It's a tangle of property taxes, utility fees, federal grants, state programs, bonds, and insurance proceeds, each covering only a fraction of the actual need. These mechanisms also interact in ways that compound the problem: climate damage erodes property values, which shrinks tax revenue, which weakens creditworthiness, which raises borrowing costs. Insurance retreat destabilizes the property markets that fund everything else.

The gap between what these tools provide and what adaptation costs doesn't show up on any municipal ledger. It shows up as the skipped culvert replacement, the patched HVAC, the inspection pushed to next fiscal year. Here are the eight mechanisms your community likely relies on, what they actually deliver, and where the cost lands.

Property Tax

Property Taxes Fund Adaptation Until Values Drop

Property tax revenue backs most local adaptation spending, from culvert replacements to emergency generators. But climate damage depresses the very property values that generate that revenue, and states like California and Colorado cap how fast assessments can grow. The tax base shrinks precisely when communities need it most.

Stormwater Fees

Stormwater Fees Are Dedicated but Deeply Insufficient

More than 2,500 communities charge stormwater utility fees, creating dedicated funds that can't be raided for other priorities. Sounds promising. But the annual funding gap for permitted stormwater systems alone runs $8 billion. And these fees cover drainage. Not wildfire clearing, not cooling upgrades, not buyout programs.

Federal Grants

Federal Grants Reward Disaster, Penalize Prevention Spending

Seventy-seven percent of FEMA-funded property mitigations since 1989 came through post-disaster programs, not pre-disaster ones. The pre-disaster BRIC program was cancelled in 2025, restored by court order, and remains institutionally fragile. Local match requirements of 25% exclude the communities most exposed to harm.

State Programs

State Programs Create a Patchwork, Not Coverage

Some states backstop federal match requirements for vulnerable communities. Vermont covers 100% of local match for certain FEMA projects. Connecticut created resilience districts modeled on tax-increment financing. But there is no national baseline. What your community can access depends entirely on your state capitol.