City of Chicago v. BP p.l.c.

The federal district court for the Northern District of Illinois agreed with the City of Chicago that the court did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the City’s lawsuit alleging that fossil fuel industry defendants’ alleged misrepresentations and concealment of the climate change harms associated with their products caused an acceleration of global warming and “devastating consequences” to Chicago and its people. The court found that the defendants had abandoned their contention that the court had jurisdiction based on federal common law. The court then concluded that it did not have jurisdiction under the federal officer removal statute, rejecting the defendants’ contention that under Seventh Circuit precedent the plaintiffs’ case fell within the scope of federal officer removal even though eight circuit courts of appeal had rejected removal in similar cases. The court found that the City had validly disclaimed claims based on the defendants’ provision of fossil fuels to the federal government for military and national defense purposes since the City’s claims were based not on that activity but on the alleged misrepresentation and deception. The court further found that other elements of federal officer removal were not satisfied: (1) the “timing of certain activities” and the “relationship of the activities to the crux of the City’s claims” did not support that the defendants were “acting under” a federal official; (2) the plaintiffs’ claims regarding the defendants’ conduct were “insufficiently connected” to any acts by the defendants under federal authority; and (3) the defendants did not have a “colorable” government contractor or other federal defense. The court denied the City’s request for fees, finding that the defendants’ arguments for removal based on the Seventh Circuit precedent were reasonable.