Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Walker

On June 29, 2016, Exxon Mobil Corporation (ExxonMobil) and the Attorney General for the United States Virgin Islands (USVI) told the federal district court for the Northern District of Texas that they had reached an agreement pursuant to which the Attorney General would withdraw the subpoena issued to ExxonMobil in March 2016 and ExxonMobil would dismiss its lawsuit against the Attorney General. In the lawsuit, ExxonMobil had alleged that the USVI Attorney General’s subpoena—issued the investigation under the territory’s Criminally Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act into suspected misrepresentations regarding ExxonMobil’s contributions to climate change—violated ExxonMobil’s constitutional rights and common law due process.

The federal court denied ExxonMobil’s motion to remand the action to state court.

ExxonMobil asked the federal court to remand the action to state court and to award it costs and fees. ExxonMobil argued that the federal court did not have jurisdiction because its action was a pre-enforcement challenge to the subpoena that would be treated as unripe under Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals precedent. ExxonMobil contended that Texas state courts had a more expansive conception of ripeness for declaratory judgment actions and would exercise jurisdiction over the action.

The United States Virgin Islands (USVI) attorney general removed Exxon Mobil Corporation’s (ExxonMobil's) action to quash a subpoena issued in the USVI attorney general's climate change investigation to federal court, asserting that there was federal question jurisdiction over ExxonMobil’s federal constitutional and statutory claims and supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims.