- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Minnesota
- /
- American Petroleum Institute v. Minnesota
Litigation
American Petroleum Institute v. Minnesota
About this case
Documents
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
01/08/2024
Decision
Certiorari denied.
The U.S. Supreme Court denied fossil fuel industry defendants’ petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmance of an order remanding to state court the State of Minnesota’s lawsuit seeking to hold the defendants liable for climate change harms. Justice Kavanaugh would have granted the petition.
01/03/2024
Appendix/Exhibit/Supplement
Supplemental brief submitted by respondent State of Minnesota in opposition to the petition for writ of certiorari.
–
09/21/2023
Amicus Motion/Brief
Motion filed by Alabama and 16 other states for leave to file amici curiae brief in support of petitioners.
–
09/21/2023
Amicus Motion/Brief
Brief filed by American Tort Reform Association in support of petitioner.
–
09/21/2023
Amicus Motion/Brief
Brief filed by amicus curiae National Association of Manufacturers in support of petitioners.
–
09/21/2023
Amicus Motion/Brief
Brief filed by the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America as amicus curiae supporting petitioners.
Five amicus briefs were filed in support of fossil fuel industry defendants’ petition for writ of certiorari seeking Supreme Court review of the Eighth Circuit’s affirmance of the remand order in the State of Minnesota’s case. The amicus briefs were filed by American Free Enterprise Chamber of Commerce, American Tort Reform Association, Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, National Association of Manufacturers, and 17 states led by Alabama. Minnesota’s response to the certiorari petition is due October 23.
09/20/2023
Amicus Motion/Brief
Brief filed by American Free Enterprise Chamber of Commerce as amicus curiae in support of petitioners.
–
08/18/2023
Petition For Writ Of Certiorari
Petition for writ of certiorari filed.
Fossil fuel industry defendants filed a petition for writ of certiorari seeking Supreme Court review of the Eighth Circuit’s affirmance of the remand to state court of the State of Minnesota’s lawsuit alleging that the defendants caused a “climate-change crisis” in the state through a “campaign of deception.” The petition presents the question of whether a federal district court has removal jurisdiction based on federal question jurisdiction “over putative state-law claims seeking redress for injuries allegedly caused by the effect of interstate greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate.” The defendants contended that the Eighth Circuit’s decision was incorrect and that it implicated “two circuit conflicts on important and recurring issues of federal law”: (1) whether the well-pleaded complaint rule precludes removal jurisdiction over claims necessarily and exclusively governed by federal common law but labeled as state-law claims and (2) “whether federal law necessarily and exclusively governs claims seeking redress for the alleged effect of interstate greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate.” The defendants acknowledged that the Court had recently declined review of these issues but argued that the Court’s intervention “has only become more pressing” because “similar cases will continue to proliferate, and similar claims could be brought against members of any number of industries that plaintiffs believe have contributed to climate change.”
Summary
Action brought by Minnesota against members of the fossil fuel industry for allegedly causing climate change harms by misleading the public by downplaying the threat of climate change and the role of their products in causing climate change.