Read more:
https://www.newsweek.com/supreme-court-alito-recusal-chevron-case-11332936
The decision could ripple beyond coastal erosion claims, influencing how readily corporations can invoke federal jurisdiction when facing state-law suits tied to historic federal work—an issue that has come up repeatedly in broader climate and energy litigation.
The Supreme Court previously rejected a lawsuit from 19 Republican-led states seeking to block climate change suits filed against the oil and gas industry by Democratic-led states.
What To Know
The case, Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, arises from lawsuits filed by Louisiana parishes seeking to hold oil and gas companies liable for alleged damage to the state’s rapidly eroding coastline.
The legal question before the Supreme Court is largely procedural: whether the companies can move the parishes’ claims out of state court and into federal court under the federal-officer removal statute, based on arguments tied to federal contracts and direction—including activity linked to wartime-era production.
The dispute arrives against a backdrop of major financial exposure for the industry. In one related case, a Louisiana jury ordered Chevron to pay more than $740 million in damages connected to coastal wetlands harm—an outcome the company has appealed.
Alito’s recusal centers on Burlington Resources’ status in the litigation. According to the clerk’s letter described in court reporting, Burlington had previously indicated it had withdrawn, but later filings showed it remained a party in the lower court—prompting Alito to step aside due to his ConocoPhillips holdings.
Alito has previously recused himself in cases where his financial holdings could pose a conflict, including matters touching on the energy sector.
What Happens Next
The Supreme Court is still expected to hear oral arguments on January 12, but now with eight participating justices. If the court splits 4–4, the judgment would stand without setting a national precedent—potentially preserving the current trajectory for these Louisiana cases. It could also determine whether climate-related lawsuits remain in state courts or move to federal jurisdiction.
Either way, the ruling will be closely watched by states and local governments pursuing environmental damage claims, and by the energy industry seeking to steer those cases into federal court.
...............
= new reply since forum marked as read