April, 17 2018, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Barb Halpin, Public Information Officer, Boulder County, bhalpin@bouldercounty.org, 303-441-1622, Ben Irwin, Deputy Director of Communication, City of Boulder, irwinb@bouldercounty.org, 303-441-3155, Amy Markwell, Attorney, San Miguel County, amym@sanmiguelcountyco.gov, 970-728-3879, Valentina Stackl, EarthRights International, valentina@earthrights.org, 202-466-5188 x100
Colorado Communities File Lawsuit Against Oil Giants for Climate Change Costs
Costs of climate change impacts estimated to top one hundred million dollars by 2050.
Boulder, Colorado
Today, the Colorado communities of Boulder County, San Miguel County, and the City of Boulder--with legal support from EarthRights International, Niskanen Center, and other co-counsel--filed a lawsuit against Suncor and ExxonMobil ("Exxon"), two oil companies with significant responsibility for climate change. The communities have demanded that these companies pay their fair share of the costs associated with climate change impacts so that the costs do not fall disproportionately on taxpayers.
Climate change affects fragile high-altitude ecosystems and hits at the heart of these communities' local economies, affecting roads and bridges, parks and forests, buildings, farming and agriculture, the ski industry, and public open space. Adapting to such a wide range of impacts requires local governments to undertake unprecedented levels of planning and spending. Over the next three decades, these communities will face at least one hundred million dollars in costs to deal with the impacts of climate change caused by the use of fossil fuel products like those made and sold by Suncor and Exxon.
Suncor and Exxon have known about the costly consequences of fossil fuel use for more than 50 years. Yet they continued to promote and sell their products, while recklessly deceiving the public and policymakers about the dangers.
In the past year, nine coastal communities in California and New York filed climate lawsuits against fossil fuel companies. This is the first such lawsuit in Colorado--or anywhere in the U.S. interior--aimed at holding fossil fuel companies accountable for paying their fair share of the costs of climate change.
Statements
"Climate change impacts are already happening and they are only going to get worse. In fact, Colorado is one of the fastest warming states in the nation. Climate change is not just about sea level rise. It affects all of us in the middle of the country as well." - Elise Jones, Boulder County Commissioner
"We are a small rural county dependent on tourism and farming and ranching. A natural disaster here could wipe out our reserves. Unabated fossil fuel production is already impacting our climate. These changes will grow more intense over time." - Hilary Cooper, San Miguel County Commissioner.
"Our communities and our taxpayers should not shoulder the cost of climate change adaptation alone. These oil companies need to pay their fair share." - Suzanne Jones, Mayor, City of Boulder
"For over 50 years, Suncor and Exxon have known that fossil fuels would cause severe climate impacts. To enhance their own profits, they concealed this knowledge and spread doubt about science they knew to be correct. Now, communities all over this country are left to foot the bill." - Marco Simons, EarthRights International
"Future generations and those least responsible for causing climate change will bear the brunt of the impacts. We need to shift the costs back to these companies that have profited off their demands for unabated pollution in the face of global climate destabilization." - Micah Parkin, 350 Colorado
"The fossil fuel industry has normalized oil and gas in our lives while concealing the dangers. It's time for a cultural shift. In the future, when we talk about 'energy,' we should be referring to renewable energy, not fossil fuels." - Rebecca Dickson, Sierra Club
"For hundreds of years, the common law has insisted that people who damage property should be held liable for their actions, and this case seeks no more than to protect property rights and the rule of law." - David Bookbinder, Niskanen Center
Background
For years, these three Colorado communities have taken action to reduce their own carbon footprints. All three have adopted ambitious CO2 emission reduction targets, passed budgets for climate work, conducted greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories, and established incentive programs for residents. Despite these efforts, taxpayers already face the rising costs of adapting to a changing climate.
Suncor and Exxon are two of the world's largest contributors to climate change and have been particularly active in Colorado. Fossil fuel combustion accounted for nearly 80 percent of all GHG emissions between 1970 and 2010.
- Exxon is the largest investor-owned fossil fuel producer in history. Suncor is one of the world's largest independent energy companies. Both are active in Colorado.
- Suncor's U.S. operations are based in Denver, Colorado; the company supplies about 35 percent of the state's gasoline and diesel fuel demand. Suncor and Exxon work closely together in Colorado to market and sell fossil fuels.
- The two companies jointly own the majority of Syncrude Canada Ltd., one of the largest developer of Canada's tar sands.
Together, Suncor and Exxon are responsible for billions of tons of CO2 emissions. Their future carbon footprint is likely to be enormous, as well: both companies plan to expand fossil fuel production through tar sands, fracking, and other means.
For more than 50 years, these oil companies have known about the harm that their products would cause to communities, but have chosen to continue business as usual. These companies have long known about the risks of their own activities. In 1968, industry scientists warned them that "significant temperature changes are almost certain to occur by the year 2000" due to rising GHGs, and that "the potential damage to our environment could be severe."
By the 1970s, Suncor and Exxon knew with high certainty that their products were dangerous and that inaction would cause dramatic, even catastrophic, changes to the climate. Exxon even took measures to protect itself from climate change: for example, the company adapted its own facilities to protect from sea level rise.
Consequently, Boulder County, San Miguel County, and the City of Boulder have partnered together to represent communities on the Front Range and the Western Slope and require these companies to help pay for the costs of climate change on local communities in Colorado. Because of the magnitude of the financial impacts, these communities feel like they have little choice but to bring this litigation on behalf of their residents.
In addition to EarthRights International, the plaintiffs are represented by David Bookbinder, Chief Legal Counsel of the Niskanen Center, and Kevin Hannon of the Hannon Law Firm LLC.
EarthRights International (ERI) is a nongovernmental, nonprofit organization that combines the power of law and the power of people in defense of human rights and the environment, which we define as "earth rights." We specialize in fact-finding, legal actions against perpetrators of earth rights abuses, training grassroots and community leaders, and advocacy campaigns. Through these strategies, EarthRights International seeks to end earth rights abuses, to provide real solutions for real people, and to promote and protect human rights and the environment in the communities where we work.
LATEST NEWS
In 'Most Serious Test Yet' of Ceasefire Deal, Trump Bombs Iran After Strike on Cargo Ship in Strait
The US attack came as Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a trilateral agreement with Israel and Lebanon, which Israeli forces have bombed and occupied throughout the Iran War.
Jun 26, 2026
US President Donald Trump resumed bombing Iran on Friday, a day after an Iranian attack on a cargo ship in the Strait of Hormuz, elevating concerns about the future of a ceasefire agreement just as Israel and Lebanon signed a related deal.
The Trump administration—which partnered with Israel to launch an illegal war on Iran in late February—and the Iranian government agreed on a memorandum of understanding (MOU) earlier this month. On Thursday, Iran attacked the Singapore-flagged commercial vessel, the Ever Lovely, in the strait, a key trade waterway.
"The Islamic Republic of Iran shot at least four One Way Attack Drones at Ships transversing the Strait of Hormuz," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform Friday morning. "One of the Drones solidly hit the upper deck of a large and very expensive Cargo Carrying Ship. Damage was done, but the Ship was able to proceed on its way. We knocked down three other Drones. Obviously, this is a foolish violation of our Ceasefire Agreement."
Responding on the social media network X, Ebrahim Azizi, who heads the Iranian Parliament's Commission on National Security and Foreign Policy, said: "The reality in the Persian Gulf has changed. The Strait of Hormuz is governed by Iran, so: Respect the rules. Use secure routes. Do not mistake control for escalation. If you do not learn the rules, the Iranian armed forces will teach them to you. This is not a violation of the ceasefire; it is ceasefire management."
Later Friday, US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that "as a powerful response to yesterday's attack on a commercial ship that was transiting the Strait of Hormuz," American aircraft "struck Iranian missile and drone storage locations and coastal radar sites."
"The unwarranted aggression against commercial shipping by Iranian forces clearly violated the ceasefire," CENTCOM said. "Furthermore, Iran's dangerous behavior undermined freedom of navigation as commerce increasingly flows through the vital international trade corridor."
"CENTCOM forces continue to provide safe passage coordination and support to commercial vessels transiting the strait," Central Command added. "The US military remains present and vigilant to ensure all aspects of the agreement with Iran are adhered to, obeyed, and in full force and effect."
Flagging CENTCOM's announcement, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) pointed out that "this marks the first publicly acknowledged US military action against Iran since the recent ceasefire agreement, potentially representing the most serious test yet of the fragile understanding between Tehran and Washington."
"Notably, the alleged violation of the MOU resulted in military retaliation," NIAC added, "contra coordination via the executive mechanism that was supposed to be established to monitor implementation of the deal."
Al Jazeera reported late Friday that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) released a statement saying it has responded with fire:
The IRGC said its Navy targeted locations in the region where US forces are deployed, without specifying where or providing additional details.
It condemned the US strikes on Iran, saying Washington, "as always, violated its commitments and launched an airstrike” on the Iranian coast.
"According to Article 5 of the memorandum of understanding, Islamabad has arrangements for controlling traffic in the Strait of Hormuz with the Islamic Republic of Iran," the IRGC said.
"However, the US, by inciting various parties, sought to violate this commitment, which was met with the necessary response," the statement continued. "If the aggression is repeated, our response will be more extensive."
As for the administration's supposedly diplomatic efforts, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the United States, Israel, and Lebanon—which Israeli forces have been bombing throughout the Iran War—had signed a trilateral framework that he claimed "builds a realistic path out of endless conflict."
"This agreement establishes a clear and structured process to restore Lebanon’s sovereignty, disarm Hezbollah, and dismantle its terrorist infrastructure, and enable Israel to return to its borders once that threat to its citizens is removed," Rubio said. "It also creates a trilateral Military Coordination Group for Lebanon (MCG4L), facilitated by the United States, allowing the two sides to implement this framework. For Lebanon, this framework provides a genuine pathway out of a long crisis. For Israel, it creates a verifiable path to removing the persistent threat on its northern border."
The framework was met with protests in the Lebanese capital. Lebanon's National News Agency reported that Hezbollah supporters gathered on motorcycles in Beirut to oppose the deal.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Good News for Clean Air' as Court Rejects Trump EPA Bid to Ditch Coal Plant Soot Rule
"The court’s rejection of the Trump administration’s attempt to eliminate our national health standards for soot will mean healthier, longer lives for people across the country," said one advocate.
Jun 26, 2026
A federal appeals court on Friday rejected the US Environmental Protection Agency's attempt to scrap a Biden-era rule tightening limits on harmful soot pollution spewed from coal-fired power plants and other sources.
In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dealt a blow to President Donald Trump's deregulatory agenda by leaving intact a national soot standard enacted in 2024 that lowers the amount of fine particulate matter from power plants, factories, and vehicles from 12 to 9 micrograms per cubic meter.
"Soot, made up of tiny toxic particles that lodge deep in the lungs, results in severe health harms, including premature death, and comes from sources like vehicle exhaust pipes, power plants, and factories," the legal advocacy group Earthjustice explained.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Administrator Lee Zeldin last year asked the appellate court to invalidate the soot rule, claiming that the Biden administration exceeded its authority and failed to take into account the economic cost of implementing the policy.
“Clean air is not a luxury. We are thrilled these vital air quality standards have been upheld by a federal court,” said Patrice Simms, vice president of Healthy Communities at Earthjustice. “The 2024 soot standard is a critical advancement for public health, projected to save thousands of lives every year. Lee Zeldin’s EPA must stop catering to polluters and must instead fulfill its mission to protect public health. The time for implementing the 2024 soot standard is now.”
Clean Air Task Force senior director of legal advocacy Shaun Goho also welcomed the ruling, saying: "Fine particulate matter standards provide critical public health protections. The court correctly rejected EPA’s about-face on the need for a stronger standard."
Katie Huffing, executive director of the Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, called Friday's decision "a win for public health."
“Every day in practice, nurses witness and treat conditions made worse by soot pollution," she said. "From asthma exacerbations and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to heart disease and preterm birth, nurses see the real-world health implications of toxic air pollution."
"The science shows stronger limits to reduce dangerous soot pollution provide significant health benefits for Americans, especially for those most vulnerable and those exposed to higher levels of particulate matter pollution," Huffing added. "We now urge EPA to fully implement the strengthened standard to ensure those health benefits are realized.”
Noha Haggag, senior attorney for the Environmental Defense Fund, said that “today’s federal court decision is good news for clean air in America and for the millions of people harmed by deadly soot."
“Soot can cause asthma attacks, lung cancer, and premature deaths," Haggag added. "The court’s rejection of the Trump administration’s attempt to eliminate our national health standards for soot will mean healthier, longer lives for people across the country.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Unhinged Trump Calls US Progressives Communist 'Animals' Who Will 'Close Your Churches' and 'Kill Your People'
The president complained about primary victories of progressives backed by New York City's democratic socialist mayor, who this week secured a rent freeze for a million units and put $15 million toward gender-affirming care.
Jun 26, 2026
After a series of electoral victories for democratic socialists and legal blows to President Donald Trump's authoritarian agenda this week, the Republican on Friday ranted to a Christian conference that progressives—whom he called "hardcore, godless communists"—are "the most serious threat to our country since its existence, in my opinion, 250 years ago."
Trump previewed his nearly 50-minute speech to the Faith and Freedom Coalition's policy conference with a lengthy post on his Truth Social platform in which he wrote: "I'd be the Greatest Communist in History. I'd give free rent, free houses, free food, everything is free. Unfortunately, after two or three years, the Country where this is taking place would fail. It always does, and then you'll start living in squalor. There will be no food, there will be no housing, there will be no Military, there will be no nothing."
In a signal that he was specifically targeting the left flank of the Democratic Party, Trump said: "They're animals! In many cases, not smart but, in some cases, they are. It's easy for them to get followers because they make promises that they know they can't keep, and the Dumocrats aren't fighting back. In many ways, they're allowing them to go their own way. They’re afraid they will lose their Election, they're afraid of conflict. They’re not smart enough or tough enough to fight this plague."
"These are not social Dumocrats, these are hardcore, godless Communists," the president continued. "Isn't it ironic, we're celebrating a very important Birthday, and instead of speaking about Christ, Freedom, and Victories of all different kinds, we're speaking about yet another threat to the Foundations of America. These ruthless Communists will attack all Religions but, in particular, Christianity—They always do. All Communist Countries attack Religions violently."
"As you know, we recently struck Nigeria, and largely ended the slaughter of their Great Christian population," he added. "They know that if they go further, the attack will be far greater and, in that, they don't want to get involved. I am saving Christians throughout the World, even though we are not in those various Countries, by hitting these Terrorists violently and hard. They will close your Churches, they will kill your people. This is what they're about."
During the actual speech, Trump specifically took aim at "the communists elected in New York City recently," who he claimed "want to completely destroy the traditional American way of life," an apparent jab at a slate of candidates who won their Democratic primaries earlier this week: Claire Valdez in New York’s 7th Congressional District, Brad Lander in the 10th District, and Darializa Avila Chevalier in the 13th District.
By contrast, US Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a democratic socialist who ran for president in 2016 and 2020, called the trio's victories proof that Americans "are sick and tired of status quo politics" and "want to end the corrupt campaign finance system, which enables billionaires to spend huge amounts of money to elect candidates who will represent their interests and go to war against working-class people."
All three campaigned on progressive policies including more affordable housing, Medicare for All, stronger union protections, and an end to US military support for Israel’s genocidal assault on Palestinians—and they were backed by New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist who continued delivering on his campaign promises on Thursday, when the NYC Rent Guidelines Board approved a two-year rent freeze affecting roughly a million apartments.
While Trump complained about that NYC development in his Friday speech, others have celebrated it. Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, which advocates for universal single-payer healthcare, said that "the real threat Zohran Mamdani poses is to the career politicians who've spent decades making promises, then making excuses, then telling people to vote harder next time. He's showing people that elected officials can actually do things that help them in their everyday lives."
Shortly before Trump's swipe at the New York progressives running for Congress, he claimed that left-leaning Democrats "want to resume the transgender 'mutilization' of our children." In addition to attacking lifesaving gender-affirming healthcare for trans youth, the president has restricted abortion access and signed legislation that's already led to millions losing insurance coverage.
Meanwhile, Mamdani on Friday announced a $15 million plan to expand access to gender-affirming care for youth and adults across the city, which includes a direct care access fund, a call and text line, and funding for research. He said that "as the federal government attacks transgender people and attempts to intimidate patients, families, and providers, New York City is stepping up."
Despite Trump's claim that the Democratic Party establishment isn't fighting back against ascendant progressives and democratic socialists, Axios reporting from Thursday suggests centrist Democrats are, in fact, gearing up to do so—and over a dozen have endorsed the "Promise to America" manifesto, emphasizing their support for capitalism, "fiscal discipline," and law enforcement.
Ripping the manifesto, D'Arrigo said: "'Centrism' is just performative compromise devoid of critical thinking, policy, or ideology. It’s a political vehicle that gives permission to do nothing in service of protecting a status quo that benefits large corporate donors and special interest groups who fund both parties."
In addition to serving the corporate interests that bankrolled his return to power, Trump has also served himself during his second term, growing the wealth of his family by billions of dollars and even accepting a luxury plane from Qatar.
Trump has also made a range of other moves that demonstrate his contempt for US law—from pardoning donors and other supporters, including insurrectionists who stormed the US Capitol, to weaponizing the Department of Justice against his enemies, to carrying out multiple illegal military actions, such as his invasion of Venezuela and abduction of its president, the ongoing war on Iran, and deadly bombings of boats his administration claims were trafficking drugs.
The president's violent and authoritarian agenda has faced some setbacks in court this week: Federal judges ruled against the administration's policy pushing US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests at courthouses, as well as a pair of Trump executive orders that attacked voting rights.
However, those cases are ongoing, plus another federal judge issued lengthy prison sentences for a group of activists who protested outside an ICE detention center and were falsely accused by the administration of being members of a nonexistent "North Texas Antifa Cell." Trump has also continued his assault on voting rights this week, scrapping plans to sign a bipartisan housing bill in a bid to pressure Congress to pass the so-called Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act.
With the November elections just over four months away, Ron Filipkowski, editor-in-chief of MeidasTouch, also took Trump's Friday Truth Social comments as a threat, saying, "This sounds a lot to me like Trump laying the groundwork to steal the midterms."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


