By Andy May
I’ve written before about the ongoing fight against ExxonMobil by far-left tobacco greedy lawyers like Mathew Pawa and environmentalists like Naomi Oreskes and leaders of the Union of Scientists. care (UCS) extreme left. You can find these articles this, this, thisand this.
Tobacco lawsuits work because tobacco causes cancer, and cancer has a measurable effect on people and governments due to the extra medical costs and premature deaths it causes. To make matters worse, tobacco companies have withheld the information they have about the dangers of smoking from the public. These two events led to Matthew Pawa and other tobacco attorneys winning the case.
The idea that Pawa, cities in California and UCS used to sue ExxonMobil is based on their claims that ExxonMobil knew about the dangers of climate change and kept this information from the public, and as a result should bargain. But as I explained in my last part book (pages 158-170), ExxonMobil publishes all of their climate research and has staff from all sides of the issue engaged in heated debates about climate change, the dangers probable and probable human origin. Furthermore, unlike cigarettes, no significant negative impact about recent climate changes (man-made or otherwise) that have been observed or measured. The whole debate has ended who is the more accurate predictor of the future, the alarmist or the skeptic, and so far, no one has won that argument, everyone has been wrong.
So these fake lawsuits accusing ExxonMobil of causing non-existent, measurable damage to ExxonMobil and the great state of Texas? ExxonMobil is protest cities and tobacco lawyers, so we’ll find out! The case is before the Supreme Court of Texas and the petition is this. It claimed that the lawsuits damaged and violated the rights of Texas and Texas, as well as ExxonMobil.
The lawsuit specifically says that the torture lawsuits, filed by Pawa and several California cities, including San Francisco, target the free speech rights of ExxonMobil and its executives, as well as publications ExxonMobil products as their popular publications. Energy outlook annual report.
Interestingly, while cities claim that the dangers of climate change are certain in their lawsuits, they claim in their municipal bond offerings that the dangers of climate change climate is uncertain. ExxonMobil requested discovery and commenced proceeding with Rule 202 to investigate the claims and retain evidence. ExxonMobil is supported in these suits by Governor Abbott of Texas, Texas Petroleum Associationand Texans to reform the lawsuit.
Can ExxonMobil sue a California city in Texas? Governor Abbott said the following in his letter to the court:
“[T]He is the energy industry vital to economic growth in Texas, employing hundreds of thousands of Texans and contributing billions of dollars each year in taxes and royalties. … The petitioner is an oil and gas company headquartered in Texas. The respondents were California and local government officials, plus a Massachusetts attorney, who is accused of using torture lawsuits in California courts as an excuse to block ten speeches. eight energy companies based in Texas on the topic of climate and energy policy. By participating in such ‘rules’, respondents obscured the “principles of state sovereignty and equity”. [dictating] that a State may not impose economic sanctions on violators of its laws with the aim of changing the legal behavior of torturers in other States. ‘ When out-of-state officials try to project their power across our border, as respondents did by widely targeting the speech of an industry important to Texas, they cannot use personal jurisdiction to get out of our courts and back out across state lines. “
This will be interesting to watch.
I am a former Exxon employee, an ExxonMobil shareholder, and am extremely biased in this fight. So sue me!
* BMW of N. Am., Inc. v. Gore, 517 US 559, 572 (1996).
Related
