In a year marked by escalating climate impacts and political shifts, American courts became a pivotal battleground in the fight for climate accountability. As the Trump administration bolstered fossil fuel interests, a counter-wave of litigation aimed at holding major oil and gas companies responsible for alleged climate deception swelled significantly throughout 2025.
Major Cases Advance, But Face Significant Hurdles
Over 70 US states, cities, and local governments have now filed suits accusing the fossil fuel industry of misleading the public about climate science. The past year saw courts repeatedly push back against attempts to derail these cases. The US Supreme Court notably declined to kill a high-profile lawsuit from Honolulu and rejected an unusual effort by several Republican-led states to block such litigation entirely. Numerous state courts also refused to dismiss cases or move them to federal courts, which are often viewed as more favourable to corporate defendants.
However, the path for plaintiffs was not without setbacks. Under external pressure, Puerto Rico voluntarily dismissed its 2024 lawsuit in May. Similarly, Charleston, South Carolina chose not to appeal after its case was thrown out.
All eyes are now on the Supreme Court as it considers whether to review a lawsuit filed by Boulder, Colorado, against two major energy firms. A decision is expected in the coming weeks. This ruling could either embolden or severely hinder the entire movement for climate accountability. The energy companies argue the case is pre-empted by federal law. If the justices side with them, it could void the Boulder case and more than a dozen others with similar legal foundations.
"So far, the oil companies have had a losing record trying to get these cases thrown out," said Richard Wiles, president of the Center for Climate Integrity. "The question is, does Boulder change that?" He added that an adverse ruling would be a "major challenge" but not "game over" for the litigation wave.
Novel Legal Strategies and Political Pushback
2025 witnessed groundbreaking legal approaches as plaintiffs sought new ways to attribute climate harms directly to corporate actions. In a landmark move, a Washington state woman filed the first-ever wrongful-death lawsuit against big oil, alleging the industry's climate negligence contributed to her mother's death during a severe heatwave.
Later in the year, Washington residents launched a class action claiming fossil fuel sector deception led to a climate-driven spike in homeowners' insurance premiums. Hawaii also joined the fray, becoming the tenth state to sue big oil, filing its case just hours after the US Department of Justice, in an unusual step, sued Hawaii and Michigan to pre-empt their litigation plans.
"These novel cases reflect the lived realities of climate harm and push the legal system to grapple with the full scope of responsibility," said Merner, a legal analyst following the trends.
The Fight for a Federal Liability Shield
Parallel to the courtroom battles, the fossil fuel industry and its political allies ramped up efforts to secure broad legal immunity. In April, President Trump signed an executive order directing the Justice Department to halt climate accountability litigation. By July, allies in Congress attempted to insert language into a funding bill to cut off Washington DC's ability to use consumer protection laws against oil and gas companies for environmental claims.
Most significantly, evidence mounted of a concerted push for a federal liability shield, potentially modelled on a 2005 law that protected the firearms industry. In June, 16 Republican state attorneys general asked the Justice Department to help create such a shield, according to the New York Times. Lobbying disclosures reviewed by Inside Climate News confirmed that major industry players, including ConocoPhillips and the American Petroleum Institute, were actively lobbying Congress on draft legislation for immunity.
"We expect they could sneak language to grant them immunity into some must-pass bill," warned Wiles. "That’s how we think they’ll play it."
What Next? Plastics and Extreme Weather in the Legal Crosshairs
Looking ahead to 2026, legal experts anticipate a continued expansion of climate accountability suits, targeting not only oil giants but other high-emitting sectors. The success of a $1.1 million greenwashing settlement against meat giant JBS by New York's attorney general may inspire similar actions.
Richard Wiles predicts more cases focusing on corporate deception regarding plastic pollution, akin to a lawsuit filed by California in 2024. Furthermore, advances in climate attribution science are expected to fuel lawsuits tied to specific extreme weather events, directly linking disasters like floods and heat domes to corporate emissions. Researchers and law firms are developing new legal theories, suggesting the surface of potential corporate liability has only just been scratched.
"Companies have engaged in decades of awful behavior that creates liability on so many fronts," Wiles concluded. "We haven’t even really scratched the surface."
