Supreme Court Opens Term With Boulder Climate Liability Case
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court opens its October 2026 term Monday, Oct. 5, with oral argument in a dispute over state power and climate liability NPR.
The case is docket No. 25-170, captioned Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc., et al., Petitioners v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, et al. Supreme Court docket. The petition for a writ of certiorari, a formal request for Supreme Court review, was docketed on Aug. 12, 2025. The Court lists Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. Commissioners of Boulder County for argument on Monday, Oct. 5, as the first case argued that day SCOTUSblog.
The question before the justices is whether a lawsuit filed in Colorado state court seeking to hold energy companies liable may go forward SCOTUSblog. The decision under review came from a Colorado court, and the Court granted certiorari to review it.
The underlying suit was filed in 2018 by the City of Boulder and Boulder County against Suncor Energy and Exxon Mobil. Boulder alleges the companies deceived people about the harms of fossil fuels and contributed to disasters costing the county time and money NPR.
Boulder alleges the companies and a trade group knew decades ago that fossil fuels would harm the environment, raising risks of floods, extreme heat and wildfires. The suit argues the defendants caused physical harm to Colorado by selling fossil fuels New York Times.
The Marshall Fire swept across Boulder County in late December 2021, including Superior and Louisville on Dec. 30, 2021. Boulder County has tied its claims to the costs of responding to that type of disaster.
The case has not gone to trial. It remains in early stages in the Colorado court system. Since 2018, the suit has survived repeated attempts by the companies to move or dismiss it, including clearing a district court. The Colorado Supreme Court scheduled oral argument for Feb. 11, 2025.
Suncor Energy and Exxon Mobil are now asking the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out Boulder's lawsuit. The companies argue only the federal government has the power and expertise to address climate change. The Court is considering their bid for immunity, or legal protection from suit, from the Boulder County claims.
Audio recordings and transcripts of all oral arguments are posted on the Court's website on the same day an argument is heard. Same-day transcripts are considered official but subject to final review.
The broader context here is procedural control. The fight is not yet about damages or final liability. It is about forum and justiciability, which court should hear the case and whether it can be decided there, and whether state tort law, the state law for seeking payment for harm, can be used to litigate harms tied to the production and sale of fossil fuels, or whether federal law leaves no room for that kind of claim to proceed.
The broader context for dockets beyond Colorado is pleading strategy, or how these suits are written. The ruling will give litigators and state and local governments a clearer read on that strategy. If the companies prevail on dismissal, similar state-court actions face a narrow path. If Boulder prevails on the threshold question, the case returns to state court for discovery and merits litigation, with pre-trial motion practice still ahead.
