SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
May, 17 2021, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Mike Meno, Center for Climate Integrity, mike@climateintegrity.org
Supreme Court Sends Baltimore Climate Damages Case Back to Appeals Court
Narrow procedural ruling does not address merits of Baltimore’s effort to hold big oil accountable for causing and lying about climate change.
WASHINGTON
The U.S. Supreme Court today ordered a federal appeals court to review additional arguments to determine whether the City of Baltimore's lawsuit seeking to hold major oil and gas companies accountable for climate damages they knowingly caused should be heard in state or federal court.
In BP P.L.C. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals erred when it agreed with a lower court that Baltimore's lawsuit should proceed in state court, where it was filed, because the appeals court found that its scope of review on the question of jurisdiction was limited only to whether or not the oil defendants acted with or on behalf of the federal government. Three other federal appeals courts -- the First, Ninth, and Tenth -- reached the same conclusion in similar climate liability lawsuits.
The Court declined to consider whether Baltimore and similar cases belong in state or federal court or the merits of the claims themselves.
Richard Wiles, executive director of the Center for Climate Integrity, released the following statement:
"This narrow procedural ruling may ultimately have little impact on efforts by Baltimore and more than 20 other states and municipalities to hold oil and gas corporations accountable for causing and lying about climate change. Virtually every court to consider this jurisdictional issue has agreed that climate damages cases filed in state court belong in state court; the one outlier ruling was overturned. While today's ruling may cause a delay for some municipalities seeking their day in court, Big Oil can't escape accountability forever."
Background on Climate Liability Cases:
Since 2017, 25 communities, including the states of Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Rhode Island; the District of Columbia, and 20 city and county governments in California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, South Carolina, and Washington have filed lawsuits to hold the oil and gas industry accountable for deceiving the public about climate change. Learn about those cases here.
The Center for Climate Integrity (CCI) helps cities and states across the country hold corporate polluters accountable for the massive impacts of climate change.
(919) 307-6637LATEST NEWS
'What on Earth Is Going On?': FAA Halts All Flights at El Paso Airport for 10 Days
"No reason given. No one, not even military users, were apparently given advanced warning," said one veteran journalist. "Aside from 9/11, I can't remember anything like that."
Feb 11, 2026
The is a developing story... Please check back for possible updates...
Speculation and alarm was triggered overnight after the Federal Aviation Administration late Tuesday, with nothing more than "special security reasons” given as a reason, ordered the suspension of all incoming and outgoing flights from the airport in El Paso, Texas.
"What on Earth is going on?" asked Franklin Leonard, a contributing editor with Vanity Fair, in a reaction to the news—given the limited information provided by the federal government—that was similarly expressed by many online.
In a post on Instagram, the El Paso International Airport said, "All flights to and from El Paso are grounded, including commercial, cargo and general aviation. The FAA has issued a flight restriction halting all flights to and from El Paso effective from February 10 at 11:30 PM (MST) to February 20 at 11:30PM (MST)." No further details were given and passengers were told to contact their carrier for status on specific flights.
Speculation on social media—including concerns about US military operations, connections to President Donald Trump's sweeping deportation operations, and other unsubstantiated notions—was rife in the early hours of Wednesday morning as word spread of the closure. Others simply noted the unusual nature of the FAA order.
"So this is really strange," John Stempkin, a veteran news producer with NPR, said of the unexplained closure. "No reason given. No one, not even military users, were apparently given advanced warning. Aside from 9/11, I can't remember anything like that."
A statement from the airport said the grounding order had been given “on short notice” and that it was waiting for additional guidance from the FAA. In its notice, the FAA said the federal government “may use deadly force” against aircraft violating the airspace and determined to pose “an imminent security threat.”
The grounding of flights, noted the Associated Press, "is likely to create significant disruptions given the duration and the size of the metropolitan area. El Paso, a border city with a population of nearly 700,000 and larger when you include the surrounding metro area, is hub of cross-border commerce alongside neighboring Ciudad Juarez in Mexico."
Reached by phone early Wednesday by the New York Times for his reaction, Representative Joaquin Castro, a Democrat who represents San Antonio, said he had no idea what was going on. “Sorry, I don’t have some clear answer,” Castro told the Times. Asked if he was surprised, the lawmaker simply said, “Yes.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Grand Jury Stops 'Outrageous' Trump DOJ Effort to Indict Democrats
"They tried to have me charged with a crime—all because of something I said that they didn’t like," said Sen. Mark Kelly. "That’s not the way things work in America."
Feb 11, 2026
A federal grand jury on Tuesday declined to go along with an effort by the Trump Justice Department to indict Democratic lawmakers involved in a November video reminding members of the US military of their duty to refuse illegal orders, a message that came as President Donald Trump deployed troops to major American cities.
The failed attempt to indict the six Democratic lawmakers was led by Trump loyalist Jeanine Pirro, a former Fox News host who is now serving as US attorney for the District of Columbia. The New York Times reported that federal prosecutors "sought to persuade the grand jurors that the lawmakers had violated a statute that forbids interfering with the loyalty, morale, or discipline of the US armed forces."
Trump, who has repeatedly weaponized the Justice Department against his political opponents, erupted in response to the 90-second video, accusing the Democratic lawmakers behind it of "seditious behavior, punishable by death."
The lawmakers who appeared in the video were Sens. Mark Kelly of Arizona and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan as well as Reps. Jason Crow of Colorado, Chrissy Houlahan and Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania, and Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire. The Democrats learned they were under investigation last month when they received inquiries from Pirro's office.
Lawmakers and legal observers said it was deeply alarming that the DOJ even tried to secure the indictment.
"What an ugly assault on the First Amendment and on Congress," said legal scholar Ryan Goodman. "Thankfully, thwarted."
Kelly, a retired Navy captain who is facing Pentagon attempts to censure him and cut his military benefits, said the effort to indict him and his fellow Democratic lawmakers was "an outrageous abuse of power by Donald Trump and his lackies."
"It wasn’t enough for Pete Hegseth to censure me and threaten to demote me, now it appears they tried to have me charged with a crime—all because of something I said that they didn’t like," Kelly wrote on social media. "That’s not the way things work in America."
We want to speak directly to members of the Military and the Intelligence Community.
The American people need you to stand up for our laws and our Constitution.
Don’t give up the ship. pic.twitter.com/N8lW0EpQ7r
— Sen. Elissa Slotkin (@SenatorSlotkin) November 18, 2025
Slotkin, a former CIA officer who organized the November video, said Pirro pursued the indictment "at the direction of President Trump, who said repeatedly that I should be investigated, arrested, and hanged for sedition."
"Today, it was a grand jury of anonymous American citizens who upheld the rule of law and determined this case should not proceed. Hopefully, this ends this politicized investigation for good," the senator said. "But today wasn’t just an embarrassing day for the administration. It was another sad day for our country."
"Because whether or not Pirro succeeded is not the point. It’s that President Trump continues to weaponize our justice system against his perceived enemies," Slotkin added. "No matter what President Trump and Pirro continue to do with this case, tonight we can score one for the Constitution, our freedom of speech, and the rule of law."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Senate GOP Kills Bill That Would've Reversed $10 Billion Trump Corporate Tax Break
Sen. Ron Wyden called the tax giveaway "indefensible at a time when so many Americans are getting battered by inflation and barely staying afloat."
Feb 10, 2026
Nearly all US Senate Republicans on Tuesday voted to block a resolution that would have reversed a Trump administration regulatory change set to give some of the country's richest companies a $10.3 billion tax break.
The Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution was spearheaded by Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Angus King (I-Maine). The vote on whether to advance it was 47-51. The only Republican to vote in favor was the other Mainer, Susan Collins, who just confirmed she is running for another term, despite two strong Democratic challengers.
In a statement after the vote, Wyden tied the target of his resolution—an Internal Revenue Service guidance undermining the corporate alternative minimum tax (CAMT)—to the sweeping budget package that GOP lawmakers passed and President Donald Trump signed last summer, which also featured significant tax breaks for the rich.
"The ink is barely dry on the megabill Trump and Republicans passed to give $1 trillion in new tax breaks to giant corporations, and now his Treasury Department is throwing another $10 billion handout to the most profitable corporations in America," Wyden said.
"The pattern we're seeing is that the Trump administration gives big corporations and ultrawealthy donors whatever tax benefits they want the second they walk through the door at the Treasury Department, but that doesn't mean the Senate has to allow this giveaway to happen," he stressed. "Stuffing $10 billion into the coffers of corporations that are already raking in enormous profits is indefensible at a time when so many Americans are getting battered by inflation and barely staying afloat."
King similarly declared that "it's downright unfair to give billions in tax relief to America's most successful corporations when Maine people are struggling to afford their prescription drugs, childcare, and groceries." He described their resolution as "a commonsense step toward a fairer tax policy that prioritizes people over profits and levels the playing field."
Although the defeat was predictable, economic justice advocates lambasted Senate Republicans for killing the resolution.
Americans for Tax Fairness executive director David Kass said in a statement that "after passing historic tax giveaways for billionaires and big business through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBA), blowing up the deficit, and cutting billions from critical healthcare and nutrition programs to pay for it, Trump and his GOP allies in the Senate are taking every opportunity to ensure economic elites can avoid paying their fair share."
"This guidance would effectively circumvent Congress and create numerous opportunities for corporate tax evasion while increasing the deficit and national debt, thus creating more imbalance in a tax code that already favors the wealthy and large corporations," Kass said. "Sen. Wyden is right to lead the charge to stop this guidance—average Americans should not be forced to subsidize some of the most profitable companies on Earth."
Like the Senate, the House of Representatives is also narrowly controlled by the GOP. Matt Gardner, a senior fellow at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, noted in a Tuesday blog post that "even if lawmakers of both parties had sufficient backbone to retake the legislative power that the executive branch has usurped, President Trump would veto such a bill."
"But as a matter of educating lawmakers and the public, the recently rejected measure was a success given that tax legislation (such as this resolution) up for a vote in Congress usually gets an official budget score from Congress' revenue estimators at the Joint Committee on Taxation," he wrote. "And in this case, that reveals that this unilateral corporate tax cut from the Trump administration will cost $10 billion over a decade unless it is reversed."
"The Senate's failure to ratify Wyden's resolution may be only the opening salvo for members of Congress who want to retake the power given them under the Constitution to make tax law," Gardner suggested. "The regulation in question is not the first, and surely not the last, attempt by President Trump to unilaterally cut corporate taxes."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular