- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States of America
- /
- Friends of the Earth v. Export-Import Bank of the United States
Friends of the Earth v. Export-Import Bank of the United States
Geography
Year
2026
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2026
Status
Pending
Geography
Docket number
1:26-cv-03592
Court/admin entity
United States → United States District Court for the District of Columbia (D.D.C.)United States → United States Federal Courts
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → Other Statutes and Regulations (US)
Principal law
United States → Administrative Procedure Act (APA)United States → Export-Import Bank Act of 1945
At issue
Challenge to March 2025 final approval of $4.7 billion Export-Import Bank loan to subsidize construction of liquefied natural gas project in Mozambique.
Topics
, ,
Documents
Each case in our database can contain one or more documents.
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Search results
10/23/2026
Plaintiffs' motion to proceed under pseudonym and seal granted in part and denied in part.
Challenge to March 2025 final approval of $4.7 billion Export-Import Bank loan to subsidize construction of liquefied natural gas project in Mozambique.
Decision
–
10/15/2026
Complaint filed.
Friends of the Earth, Justiça Ambiental, and individual plaintiffs who live, farm, and fish near a liquefied natural gas project in Mozambique filed a new lawsuit challenging the March 2025 approval by the board of the Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM) of a $4.7 billion loan to subsidize the project’s construction. On the same day, the plaintiffs filed a proposed amended and supplemental complaint in a lawsuit filed in 2025. The two complaints were intended to cure standing issues after the D.C. Circuit concluded the organizational plaintiffs lacked standing. The complaints asserted identical claims that EXIM violated the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945 and the Administrative Procedure Act, including by failing to evaluate the project’s climate-related risks and impacts. The individual plaintiffs also asserted new claims of negligence, conversion, trespass, public nuisance, private nuisance, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and unjust enrichment against the defendant-intervenor TotalEnergies EP Mozambique Area 1, Limitada (Total), the TotalEnergies SE subsidiary operating the project. Total voluntarily intervened in the 2025 lawsuit. The new complaints did not assert a NEPA claim; the D.C. Circuit had found that the organizations were unlikely to succeed on the merits of such a claim.
Complaint
–
Summary
Challenge to March 2025 final approval of $4.7 billion Export-Import Bank loan to subsidize construction of liquefied natural gas project in Mozambique.
Topics mentioned most in this case
See how often Topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document.
Group
Topics
Policy instrument
Risk
Impacted group
Just transition
Renewable energy
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance