ExxonMobil is targeting lawyers and climate advocates with legal challenges for filing lawsuits against the company. (Photo: Johnny Silvercloud/flickr/cc)
'A Big Scare Tactic': ExxonMobil Files 'Conspiracy' Counter Suits Against Climate Defenders
Critics charge that by "positioning itself as a victim rather than a perpetrator," the company is aiming to "reframe the debate, use it as a diversionary tactic, and scare the heck out of everybody."
In response to a series of lawsuits aimed at holding the oil giant to account for its climate crimes, ExxonMobil is taking "a bare-knuckle approach rarely seen in legal disputes" by threatening and filing counter suits against those who have sued them.
"Rather than bully communities trying to protect themselves, ExxonMobil should direct its vast resources to help fix the problem--and accept responsibility for the damages their products have caused."
--Peter Frumhoff, Union of Concerned Scientists
ExxonMobil "has targeted at least 30 people and organizations, including the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts, hitting them with suits, threats of suits, or demands for sworn depositions," based upon claims that "the lawyers, public officials, and environmental activists are 'conspiring' against it in a coordinated legal and public relations campaign," Bloomberg reports.
After a 2015 investigative report by InsideClimate News found that ExxonMobil had "conducted cutting-edge climate research decades ago and then, without revealing all that it had learned, worked at the forefront of climate denial, manufacturing doubt about the scientific consensus that its own scientists had confirmed," attorneys general Eric Schneiderman of New York and Maura Healey of Massachusetts opened investigations into whether the company defrauded investors.
Additionally, New York City as well as eight cities and counties in California have sued ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel companies on the grounds that they have denied and concealed climate science showing the long-term consequences of using oil and gas, and that they should shoulder some of the economic costs generated from the environmental harm their products have caused.
ExxonMobil has named the supposed "coordinated" campaign against them "The La Jolla playbook," inspired by a 2012 meeting of a couple dozen people in La Jolla, California, to explore legal strategies that could be taken to address climate change--a meeting which the company, as Bloomberg notes, is framing "as ground zero for its conspiracy claim."
"It's crazy that people are subpoenaed for attending a meeting," Sharon Eubanks, an attorney who attended the La Jolla event, told Bloomberg. She sees the actions as "a big scare tactic: reframe the debate, use it as a diversionary tactic, and scare the heck out of everybody."
When ExxonMobil made moves indicating potential counter suits in California last month, Peter Frumhoff, chief climate scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists, declared that its strategy "to intimidate these communities by threatening lawsuits is just another effort to evade accountability for its decades-long campaign to deceive the public about climate science, and block policies that could have limited the climate impacts that California residents are now facing."
"People often try to use litigation to change the cultural conversation. Exxon is positioning itself as a victim rather than a perpetrator."
--Alexandra Lahav, University of Connecticut School of Law
"Rather than bully communities trying to protect themselves," he argued, "ExxonMobil should direct its vast resources to help fix the problem--and accept responsibility for the damages their products have caused."
Alexandra Lahav, a professor at the University of Connecticut School of Law, posed that ExxonMobil's motive could be broader than scaring off future legal challenges or quashing those it's currently facing.
"People often try to use litigation to change the cultural conversation," Lahav noted. "Exxon is positioning itself as a victim rather than a perpetrator."
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
In response to a series of lawsuits aimed at holding the oil giant to account for its climate crimes, ExxonMobil is taking "a bare-knuckle approach rarely seen in legal disputes" by threatening and filing counter suits against those who have sued them.
"Rather than bully communities trying to protect themselves, ExxonMobil should direct its vast resources to help fix the problem--and accept responsibility for the damages their products have caused."
--Peter Frumhoff, Union of Concerned Scientists
ExxonMobil "has targeted at least 30 people and organizations, including the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts, hitting them with suits, threats of suits, or demands for sworn depositions," based upon claims that "the lawyers, public officials, and environmental activists are 'conspiring' against it in a coordinated legal and public relations campaign," Bloomberg reports.
After a 2015 investigative report by InsideClimate News found that ExxonMobil had "conducted cutting-edge climate research decades ago and then, without revealing all that it had learned, worked at the forefront of climate denial, manufacturing doubt about the scientific consensus that its own scientists had confirmed," attorneys general Eric Schneiderman of New York and Maura Healey of Massachusetts opened investigations into whether the company defrauded investors.
Additionally, New York City as well as eight cities and counties in California have sued ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel companies on the grounds that they have denied and concealed climate science showing the long-term consequences of using oil and gas, and that they should shoulder some of the economic costs generated from the environmental harm their products have caused.
ExxonMobil has named the supposed "coordinated" campaign against them "The La Jolla playbook," inspired by a 2012 meeting of a couple dozen people in La Jolla, California, to explore legal strategies that could be taken to address climate change--a meeting which the company, as Bloomberg notes, is framing "as ground zero for its conspiracy claim."
"It's crazy that people are subpoenaed for attending a meeting," Sharon Eubanks, an attorney who attended the La Jolla event, told Bloomberg. She sees the actions as "a big scare tactic: reframe the debate, use it as a diversionary tactic, and scare the heck out of everybody."
When ExxonMobil made moves indicating potential counter suits in California last month, Peter Frumhoff, chief climate scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists, declared that its strategy "to intimidate these communities by threatening lawsuits is just another effort to evade accountability for its decades-long campaign to deceive the public about climate science, and block policies that could have limited the climate impacts that California residents are now facing."
"People often try to use litigation to change the cultural conversation. Exxon is positioning itself as a victim rather than a perpetrator."
--Alexandra Lahav, University of Connecticut School of Law
"Rather than bully communities trying to protect themselves," he argued, "ExxonMobil should direct its vast resources to help fix the problem--and accept responsibility for the damages their products have caused."
Alexandra Lahav, a professor at the University of Connecticut School of Law, posed that ExxonMobil's motive could be broader than scaring off future legal challenges or quashing those it's currently facing.
"People often try to use litigation to change the cultural conversation," Lahav noted. "Exxon is positioning itself as a victim rather than a perpetrator."
In response to a series of lawsuits aimed at holding the oil giant to account for its climate crimes, ExxonMobil is taking "a bare-knuckle approach rarely seen in legal disputes" by threatening and filing counter suits against those who have sued them.
"Rather than bully communities trying to protect themselves, ExxonMobil should direct its vast resources to help fix the problem--and accept responsibility for the damages their products have caused."
--Peter Frumhoff, Union of Concerned Scientists
ExxonMobil "has targeted at least 30 people and organizations, including the attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts, hitting them with suits, threats of suits, or demands for sworn depositions," based upon claims that "the lawyers, public officials, and environmental activists are 'conspiring' against it in a coordinated legal and public relations campaign," Bloomberg reports.
After a 2015 investigative report by InsideClimate News found that ExxonMobil had "conducted cutting-edge climate research decades ago and then, without revealing all that it had learned, worked at the forefront of climate denial, manufacturing doubt about the scientific consensus that its own scientists had confirmed," attorneys general Eric Schneiderman of New York and Maura Healey of Massachusetts opened investigations into whether the company defrauded investors.
Additionally, New York City as well as eight cities and counties in California have sued ExxonMobil and other fossil fuel companies on the grounds that they have denied and concealed climate science showing the long-term consequences of using oil and gas, and that they should shoulder some of the economic costs generated from the environmental harm their products have caused.
ExxonMobil has named the supposed "coordinated" campaign against them "The La Jolla playbook," inspired by a 2012 meeting of a couple dozen people in La Jolla, California, to explore legal strategies that could be taken to address climate change--a meeting which the company, as Bloomberg notes, is framing "as ground zero for its conspiracy claim."
"It's crazy that people are subpoenaed for attending a meeting," Sharon Eubanks, an attorney who attended the La Jolla event, told Bloomberg. She sees the actions as "a big scare tactic: reframe the debate, use it as a diversionary tactic, and scare the heck out of everybody."
When ExxonMobil made moves indicating potential counter suits in California last month, Peter Frumhoff, chief climate scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists, declared that its strategy "to intimidate these communities by threatening lawsuits is just another effort to evade accountability for its decades-long campaign to deceive the public about climate science, and block policies that could have limited the climate impacts that California residents are now facing."
"People often try to use litigation to change the cultural conversation. Exxon is positioning itself as a victim rather than a perpetrator."
--Alexandra Lahav, University of Connecticut School of Law
"Rather than bully communities trying to protect themselves," he argued, "ExxonMobil should direct its vast resources to help fix the problem--and accept responsibility for the damages their products have caused."
Alexandra Lahav, a professor at the University of Connecticut School of Law, posed that ExxonMobil's motive could be broader than scaring off future legal challenges or quashing those it's currently facing.
"People often try to use litigation to change the cultural conversation," Lahav noted. "Exxon is positioning itself as a victim rather than a perpetrator."