{"id":363943,"date":"2025-01-30T08:21:31","date_gmt":"2025-01-30T07:21:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=363943"},"modified":"2025-01-30T08:21:33","modified_gmt":"2025-01-30T07:21:33","slug":"californias-latest-climate-lawsuit-scheme-sue-oil-companies-for-wildfires-ignore-reality","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=363943","title":{"rendered":"California\u2019s Latest Climate Lawsuit Scheme: Sue Oil Companies for Wildfires, Ignore Reality"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Watts Up With That?<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Charles Rotter<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ah, California lawmakers are at it again, pushing the boundaries of legal absurdity with a bill that would allow victims of natural disasters to sue oil companies for damages. Yes, you read that correctly\u2014wildfire victims could now take ExxonMobil to court as if hurricanes and forest fires suddenly started appearing the moment someone filled up their SUV\u200b.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
https:\/\/www.msn.com\/en-us\/news\/us\/california-considers-letting-wildfire-victims-sue-oil-companies-for-damages\/ar-AA1xXQzF?<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The Legal Logic of a Cartoon Villain<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The bill, introduced by two Democratic legislators, is based on the idea that oil and gas companies have been deceptively<\/em> hiding the risks of climate change while, presumably, twirling their mustaches and laughing maniacally. The argument is that fossil fuel use has \u201cintensified storms and wildfires,\u201d costing Californians billions of dollars and even sending the state\u2019s insurance market into turmoil\u200b.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There\u2019s just one problem: this entire premise has already been tried\u2014and laughed out of court. Sher Edling, the law firm spearheading climate litigation, has been slapping lawsuits on oil companies for years using this exact strategy, and guess what? It has failed over and over again. Courts have rejected these cases, recognizing that pinning every natural disaster on Big Oil is about as scientifically rigorous as blaming your morning coffee for rush hour traffic\u200b.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sher Edling: The Lawsuit Factory<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Sher Edling has been on a mission to sue oil companies into oblivion, using the same flimsy arguments that courts have repeatedly rejected. Their entire playbook is based on two thoroughly discredited document sets:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. The\u00a0\u201creposition global warming\u201d<\/a>\u00a0memos\u2014unsolicited PR pitches that were never adopted by the industry.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. The\u00a0\u201cvictory will be achieved\u201d<\/a>\u00a0memos\u2014also unused, but somehow still treated as incriminating evidence.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
    \n

    The proposal claims that the oil industry intentionally deceived the public about the risks of fossil fuels on climate change that now have intensified storms and wildfires<\/a> and caused billions of dollars in damage in California. Such disasters have also driven the state insurance market to a crisis<\/a> where companies are raising rates, limiting coverage or pulling out completely from regions susceptible to wildfires and other natural disasters, supporters of the bill said.

    https:\/\/www.msn.com\/en-us\/news\/us\/california-considers-letting-wildfire-victims-sue-oil-companies-for-damages\/ar-AA1xXQzF?<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

    Yet, despite their track record of failure, they keep finding new ways to push this nonsense. Now, instead of arguing in federal courts (where they\u2019ve been shut down repeatedly), they\u2019re shifting their strategy to state-level litigation, hoping that activist judges in California will give them a sympathetic ear\u200b.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Scapegoating Oil Companies While Ignoring the Real Culprits<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

    One of the most ridiculous aspects of this proposal is that it conveniently ignores other major contributors to California\u2019s wildfire crisis. For example:<\/p>\n\n\n\n