Climate lawsuit could be ‘carbon tax’ in disguise, attorney says

Huge climate The lawsuit, which could be brought to the Supreme Court, is an attempt to impose a “carbon tax” through the back door, a climate lawyer previously involved in the case said during a recent legal forum.

“The legal war has finally been exposed for what it is: a radical attempt to force progressive lifestyle choices on the American people through the courtroom,” O. H. Skinner, executive director of the Alliance For Consumers, a nonprofit focused on consumer protection efforts, told Fox News Digital.

“Whether it’s dark-money left-wing nonprofits lying about their efforts to indoctrinate judges or climate lawyers telling the truth about their desire to control the energy industry and impose a carbon tax through court decree, the result is an economy the American people don’t want — increased costs and decreased choices.”

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering whether to hear a case that originated in Boulder, ColoradoAlleging that Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil for years underestimated the risks surrounding oil and gas flaring, they sought damages from the companies under Colorado law. Conservative lawmakers warned that the case could bankrupt the American oil industry and put national security and the American economy in tatters.

SCALISE LEADS GOP TO FIGHT IN SCOTUS TO STOP THE LEFT’S “radical” war on American energy

A massive climate lawsuit that could reach the Supreme Court is an attempt to impose a “carbon tax” through the back door, a climate lawyer involved in the case revealed during a legal forum. (Brian A. Jackson/South Florida Sun Sentinel)

David Bookbinder, who was the attorney of record in the lawsuit in Boulder, Colorado, but is no longer actively involved in the case, joined Federal Community Forum In October, “Can State Courts Create Global Climate Policy,” he identified the case as part of an effort to impose an indirect tax on carbon. In other words, this issue aims to increase costs for oil companies that are then passed on to consumers as part of a broader effort to reduce oil use across the board. He told Fox Digital that he joined the forum in his personal capacity.

“Damage liability is essentially an indirect carbon tax,” Bookbinder said during the forum. “If you sue an oil company, an oil company will be held liable, and then the oil company will shift that responsibility to the people who buy its products. It’s kind of the most efficient way — the people who buy those products will now pay the cost that those products charge. I’d prefer an actual carbon tax, but if we can’t get one, and I don’t think anyone on this committee would agree that Congress is likely to deal with climate change any time soon. So that’s a fairly complicated way to achieve the goals of a carbon tax. The people who use the products pay “The price for the damage you cause.”

A climate protester climbs the Wilson Building as part of the Earth Day march against fossil fuels on April 22, 2022. (Getty Images)

Bookbinder suggested that climate litigation aims to take over the energy industry.

“The task is to ensure that the assets are then used for the benefit of creditors,” he said. “These assets will continue to produce. Oil and gas will not suddenly stop coming to market. Rather, they will be marketed in different ways.”

Bookbinder told Fox News Digital that his comments “were intended to describe the way the oil and gas industry operates, not to endorse the way it operates,” adding that his comments were made in his personal capacity as a longtime “industry watchdog.”

He said the “fake outrage at these comments by oil and gas lobbyists” was similar to the tactics used by the old tobacco lobby to “deny customers, frame them, overcharge them, and then blame whistleblowers who say there’s a problem.”

“The CEOs of the Big Oil companies, along with their state trading partners, know that their products are harmful to the public and the health of the American people,” he told Fox News Digital in an emailed statement. “These Big Oil CEOs and their agents in the states should be paying for that, not the average American consumer at the gas station. American consumers know it is a very hard truth that multinational oil companies are looking for any excuse they can find to stick it on the public at the gas station at high prices.”

“These Big Oil CEOs are opportunistic and ruthless, and that means pain for consumers and our planet, no matter how many ads they run trying to whitewash the harm their products cause, and the costs to taxpayers and the public as a result of that harm.”

“He wasn’t saying that the damage liability should actually be an indirect carbon tax,” Bookbinder continued.

He continued: “I have lamented the fact that the CEOs of multinational oil companies and their counterparts in the United States will always double down on the interests of the American consumer by hitting consumers with a harmful product and high prices, unless Congress takes action, which it does not.”

“This is a problem for both parties. Gas prices have become a political football because neither party has found the courage to stand up to the oil and gas lobby. I don’t think American consumers should pay twice for the damage oil and gas companies are doing to our health and our planet, but unfortunately, that’s what’s happening right now in America. And that’s the way things are going to continue unless members of both parties in Congress get back to work and figure it out.”

The forum came at a time when the legal case itself was being presented as one of protecting the environment and holding companies accountable for misleading the public about the risks surrounding their oil practices.

The Supreme Court should freeze the climate racketeering of our energy industry

Big energy companies have argued that the case focuses on transnational emissions, making it a federal rather than a state issue. Exxon and Suncor asked the US Supreme Court to pursue the case after the Colorado Supreme Court ruled last May that it could proceed in state courts.

“This ruling confirms what we have known all along: Corporations cannot mislead the public and avoid accountability for the harms they cause,” Aaron Brockett, the mayor of Boulder, Colorado, said in a statement at the time celebrating the state Supreme Court’s decision. “Our community has suffered greatly from the consequences of climate change, and today’s decision brings us one step closer to the justice and resources we need to protect our future.”

The Supreme Court is expected soon to decide whether to grant certification in the case and review the case.

Climate lawsuits and litigation have become more heated in the United States in recent years. (John Elswick/Associated Press)

Top energy group calls for investigation into secret ‘national legal campaign’ to influence climate judges

Dozens of republican The issue is mired in national security and stability concerns, House lawmakers wrote in an amicus brief in October, saying it could stifle the U.S. energy industry, “if not bankrupt it outright.”

Climate lawsuits and litigation have escalated in the United States in recent years, with lawmakers and conservative experts decrying that left-wing activists are waging a “legal war” over the potential bankruptcy of the industry.

For example, the Climate Justice Project has repeatedly drawn the wrath of lawmakers like Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz as an influencer. Judges He chaired climate cases, with Cruz previously arguing that the group is “pressuring judges to set aside the rule of law and instead rule according to a predetermined political narrative.”

The Climate Judiciary Project (CJP), founded by the left-wing Environmental Law Institute in 2018, describes itself as providing judges with “credible, objective, and authoritative education on climate science, the impacts of climate change, and the ways in which climate science emerges in the law,” according to its website.

Sunrise light hits the dome of the U.S. Capitol on Thursday, January 2, 2025, as the 119th Congress is scheduled to begin its work on Friday. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

The Criminal Justice Center emphasized in a September press release that it does not explicitly work to “influence the outcome of any case,” but instead serves as an educational resource.

“CJP does not seek to influence the outcome of any case, but rather seeks to present factual information about the emerging science in the law and the relevant claims and defenses made by all parties. Accusations against CJP that its goal is to influence the outcome of a few dozen cases brought against fossil fuel companies are false,” the September press release said.

The climate law campaign has been dealt a major blow in South Carolina

Fox News Digital previously reported on CJP’s curriculum, including classes that prepared judges for global warming cases, including a module dedicated to Discussing “climate justice” Which states that lower-income communities have historically experienced more environmental damage such as “higher exposure to heat, flooding, vehicular traffic, hazardous materials and pollutants, deteriorating civic infrastructure, poverty, and crime.”

Fox News Digital has obtained the archived chat log of a now-defunct chat forum between the CJP and the lawmen in July 2025, which includes details of numerous messages between at least five judges and CJP staff exchanging links about climate studies, congratulating each other on hosting recent environmental events, sharing updates on recent climate cases referred to state courts, and encouraging each other to participate in other CJP meetings.

The CJP said at the time that the forum was created to facilitate communications between members of the Judicial Leaders in Climate Science Programme, adding that CJP’s programs “are no different from the work of other continuing judicial education organizations that address important complex topics, including medicine, technology and neuroscience.”

Jason Isaacs, CEO of the American Energy Institute, a conservative group that supports US energy production policy, wrote a letter to Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan in September citing evidence in Multnomah County v. ExxonMobil et al on September 12. The court filing which he said indicated “secret coordination and judicial manipulation” by the CJP. The letter called on Jordan to subpoena records from the group.

The Climate Group deletes the names of the judges from its website after open conversations that revealed comfortable relations

Climate activists attend a rally to end fossil fuels, in New York, Sunday, September 17, 2023. (AP Photo/Brian Woolston)

CJP and the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) have repeatedly denied that their work influences judges or supports litigation, instead serving an educational resource for the legal community.

“The CJP does not participate in or provide support for litigation. Instead, the CJP provides ongoing, evidence-based education to judges about climatology How does it arise in the law? “Our approach is fact-based, science-first, grounded in consensus reporting and developed through a robust peer review process that meets the highest scientific standards,” Environmental Law Institute spokesman Nick Collins told Fox News Digital in September, denying that ELI did not fund the nature study at the heart of Isaacs’ letter that month.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Fox News Digital reached out to CJP and ELI for additional comment on Friday but did not immediately receive a response.

Fox News Digital’s Deirdre Heavey and Andrew Mark Miller contributed to this report.