Energy In Depth. 8.20.24. Nicole Jacobs. 

Bucks County violated Pennsylvania’s public records law by filing a climate lawsuit without properly notifying the public, without any public comment period, and without a traceable public record, energy companies argued earlier this month in a Motion to Dismiss the case. 

Although elected officials often discuss litigation matters in closed special sessions, the companies’ August 5 motion argues that Pennsylvania’s Sunshine Act required the Bucks County’s commissioners to approve any “official action” by majority vote in an open meeting allowing public opinion: 

“Pennsylvania law and policy requires that significant matters like bringing this lawsuit be approved in a public forum where constituents can participate in the debate, but there has been no such public debate or approval to bring this action. Pennsylvania law forbids the cloak and dagger measures used here, particularly when the impetus for such litigation was out-of-state-activists and funders with a political and social agenda that is not necessarily consistent with the consensus views of the Commonwealth.” (Emphasis added) 

EID Climate raised this key question of transparency back in March when the suit was first filed: When did the council vote happen, was it done in public, and if not, why? Turns out, it was indeed done in darkness with “no record of such an open meeting, let alone a vote” – something that not only violated public trust, but Pennsylvania law itself.  

Local Groups Push Back 

The lawsuit’s filing – and Bucks County’s improper process behind it – spurred swift backlash from Pennsylvania business groups, labor, and citizens alike who blasted the “hypocritical,” “non-sensical,” and “abusive” lawsuit while highlighting that the suit was discussed with no public scrutiny.  

The sole Bucks County Republican Commissioner also quickly withdrew support for the lawsuit, while State Senator Gene Yaw announced plans to introduce legislation that would bar the distribution of the state’s impact fees to any municipality pursuing climate litigation. 

At the same time, EID Climate also questioned who was working behind the scenes to push this lawsuit. We suspected Center for Climate Integrity (CCI) – a Rockefeller funded D.C. activist group who uses a familiar playbook throughout the country to recruit litigation-favorable municipalities – was involved. Turns out, that was also true.  

In an expansive piece about the Rockefellers’ growing movement to create, fund, and amplify the multi-pronged attacks on oil and natural gas producers, the Wall Street Journal confirmed that CCI “swayed officials” to bring the suit in Bucks County.  

Similarly, Broad and Liberty reported in June that CCI was eager to use Pennsylvania’s inaugural lawsuit as “a springboard” for other outreach, including in Delaware and Chester Counties.  

Motion Also Cites Precedent Throwing Out Climate Cases 

The Motion to Dismiss also cites recent rulings that have decisively defeated climate cases, most recently in Maryland where a state judge dismissed Baltimore’s entire climate liability lawsuit.  

Baltimore’s ruling firmly rejected the cornerstone legal theory behind the litigation campaign, explaining that state law cannot be used to advance national energy policy and address a global phenomenon such as climate change: 

“The Constitution’s federal structure does not allow the application of state law to claims like those presented by Baltimore. … The Supreme Court of the United States has held that state law cannot be used to resolve claims seeking redress for injuries caused by out of state pollution (sources).” (Emphasis added) 

Baltimore’s defeat adds to a growing list of nails in the coffin for the climate litigation campaign, including New York and neighboring Baltimore County.  

Bottom Line: The problems keep coming for the nationally coordinated and billionaire-funded climate litigation campaign. With little victories to point to after a decade of work to eliminate the oil and gas industry, it’s no wonder activists pitched a dark-in-the-night strategy that would avoid public scrutiny. However, Pennsylvania law – and Pennsylvanians themselves – prevent this type of run-around lawfare.   

Link to article: Bucks County Climate Suit Bucked Transparency Laws, Motion to Dismiss Filed (eidclimate.org)

Want to continue to get all the insider oil and gas news? Become a PIOGA member and you’ll get access to The PIOGA Press monthly newsletter, the PIOGA eWeekly e-newsletter and many other member benefits. Click here to learn more and join today!