Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has recused himself from participating in Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, a major climate change case involving oil companies ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy. The decision was announced by Supreme Court Clerk Scott Harris in a letter to attorneys on September 28, just one week before oral arguments scheduled for October 5.
Key Facts:
- Alito’s recusal means he will not take part in the case, which centers on whether federal law precludes state and local governments from suing energy companies over alleged climate harms.
- The Supreme Court’s code of conduct states that a justice should step aside if a reasonable person might question their impartiality, including financial interests in a party or the subject of a case. Harris did not provide a reason for Alito’s withdrawal.
Background of the Case:
The lawsuit was filed in 2018 by Boulder County and San Miguel County in Colorado, along with other local governments, against ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy. The plaintiffs allege that the companies’ fossil fuel products contributed to climate change, causing harm to their communities. The oil companies argue that federal law blocks such state law claims.
The case is part of a broader trend of climate-related litigation, with dozens of state and local governments pursuing similar lawsuits against energy companies. The Supreme Court’s decision in this matter could set a precedent for the viability of these claims nationwide.
Financial Holdings and Prior Recusal:
Alito has disclosed holdings in several energy companies, including ConocoPhillips and Phillips 66, though not in ExxonMobil or Suncor Energy. Environmental and watchdog groups had previously called for his recusal, citing potential conflicts of interest. Alito had recused himself from an earlier iteration of the case in 2023, when the Supreme Court declined to take it up.
The Supreme Court’s spokeswoman previously stated that Alito had no financial interest in any party involved in the case and that legal counsel had advised him he was not required to recuse. The court has not indicated whether financial interests or other factors influenced Alito’s latest decision.
Scope of the Dispute:
The justices will consider two key questions in the case:
- Whether federal law precludes state and local governments from pursuing claims under state tort law for damages allegedly caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
- Whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to decide the case at this stage.
The Trump administration has supported the oil companies’ position, arguing that federal law forecloses the claims brought by Boulder County and other plaintiffs.
Implications of Alito’s Recusal:
With Alito’s recusal, the Supreme Court will hear the case with eight justices participating. The decision could have significant implications for climate litigation, potentially limiting the ability of state and local governments to seek damages from energy companies for alleged contributions to climate change. The outcome may also influence the trajectory of similar lawsuits across the country.