Progressives have a favorite trick. When they lose at the ballot box or can’t muscle a bill through Congress, they retreat to the courtroom. It’s not new. Americans have watched this playbook unfold for years — activists dodging the democratic process and hunting for sympathetic judges willing to impose policies that voters never endorsed. There’s a word for it: lawfare.
And now that strategy has burrowed its way into the one sector Americans can least afford to see disrupted — energy. While families wrestle with gas prices that seem to climb by the week, a coalition of climate activists and their local government allies is attempting to use state courts to gut the fossil fuel industry from the inside. The goal here isn’t justice or environmental protection. It’s control. And the bill? That gets mailed straight to you.
From Fox News:
More than 70 lawmakers are lining up against a Colorado county’s effort to hold major oil companies financially liable for alleged climate change damages.
The group of House Republicans led by House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., is calling on the Supreme Court to side with ExxonMobil and Suncor Energy in a hotly contested climate change lawsuit that they argue amounts to a costly “war on American energy.”
Good. It’s about time someone pushed back.
Boulder County, Colorado, launched this legal crusade back in 2018, alleging that oil companies knowingly fueled global warming and deliberately misled the public about climate harms. Eight years later, the case has snaked through the Colorado court system — where the state Supreme Court gave it the green light to proceed under state law — and now it’s headed to the nation’s highest court. The Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments this fall in Suncor v. Boulder, with a ruling anticipated in 2027.
The central legal question is blunt: should one county courthouse in Colorado get to set energy policy for 330 million Americans? The Republican amicus brief — filed by attorneys at Boyden Gray on behalf of the 70-plus lawmakers — argues that the answer is an unambiguous no. Letting state courts adjudicate global climate damages would spawn a “cacophony of competing state commands” that trample Congress’s constitutional authority.
The brief’s sharpest line deserves repeating: “The Court should reject this attempt by Respondents to establish their ‘own foreign policy’ from a Boulder courthouse.” A county government conducting foreign policy. Let that sink in.
The real target isn’t Big Oil — it’s your wallet
Scalise framed the threat without any sugarcoating: “Radical activists are trying to use the courts to accomplish what they couldn’t achieve through legislation — forcing their radical agenda on the American people and driving energy costs even higher.”
He’s dead right. And here’s the part that should alarm everyone: Boulder isn’t some lone crusader. Dozens of nearly identical suits are grinding through courtrooms across the country right now. If the Supreme Court lets this one survive, the floodgates swing wide open. The Republican brief warns that the “sheer magnitude of the alleged damages would restructure the American energy industry if not bankrupt it altogether — and cause ripple effects worldwide.”
Pause on that. An entire industry — one that employs millions, heats homes, and moves every product on every shelf in America — potentially dismantled not by legislation or market competition, but by a daisy chain of local litigation orchestrated by activist politicians. That’s not governance. That’s sabotage with a legal brief.
Families are already paying the price
None of this is theoretical for people filling up their tanks every week. A Fox News Poll published in May found that nearly 90% of voters called rising gas prices a “problem.” The ongoing conflict with Iran has only tightened the vise. Families don’t need an economics degree to understand that attacking energy producers in court means higher costs at the pump and on their utility bills.
Rep. Gabe Evans, a Colorado freshman Republican who represents a swing district near Boulder, signed the brief and put it plainly: “These lawsuits and regulations aren’t just attacks on oil and gas companies — they’re attacks on Colorado jobs, American energy independence and every family already struggling with higher costs.”
Evans sees this fight from the front row. His district sits in the crosshairs of progressive climate litigation and real-world energy economics simultaneously. His prescription — “unleash the all-of-the-above energy strategy our nation needs” — is common sense dressed up as policy.
The court that matters most gets its say
The Supreme Court has a genuine opportunity this fall to shut this down. The constitutional principle isn’t complicated: national energy policy belongs to Congress, not to activist county attorneys armed with state tort claims and global ambitions. Either the separation of powers means something, or any municipality in America can wage economic warfare against industries it finds ideologically inconvenient.
Seventy-plus House Republicans have planted their flag. The left filed their lawsuits. Now it’s the justices’ turn to defend the constitutional order — and every American family that depends on affordable energy to make it through the month.
Key Takeaways
- Over 70 House Republicans are urging the Supreme Court to block climate lawfare against U.S. energy producers.
- County courthouses have no constitutional business dictating national energy policy — that authority belongs to Congress.
- A ruling favoring Boulder County could unleash dozens of copycat suits capable of crippling the fossil fuel industry.
- With nearly 90% of voters already alarmed by gas prices, these lawsuits would only deepen the pain at the pump.
The post Seventy GOP Lawmakers Petition Supreme Court to Reject Anti-Energy Lawsuit appeared first on Patriot Journal.
