Montgomery, AL – Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall has taken a prominent role in a coalition of 20 states filing an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court regarding a significant case concerning national energy policy. The lawsuit, initiated by the City and County of Honolulu, alleges that the energy industry’s practices have contributed to a global climate crisis, seeking to impose substantial penalties on energy companies for purportedly misleading consumers about environmental impacts.
In his statement, Attorney General Marshall highlighted the importance of federal oversight in shaping the nation’s energy policies, emphasizing that decisions of this magnitude should be made at the federal level rather than through individual city lawsuits. He also raised concerns about what he perceived as potential hypocrisy in Honolulu’s stance, given the city’s reliance on fossil fuels for sectors like travel and tourism while attempting to impose costs on the broader nation.
Alabama’s involvement in this legal effort follows its previous actions in September 2023, where it sought to block a similar lawsuit brought by Minnesota in its state courts. The coalition’s brief argues that cases regarding interstate emissions should be governed by federal law to protect each state’s sovereignty in establishing energy and environmental objectives. It contends that Hawaii’s lawsuit raises interstate issues that necessitate federal resolution to prevent significant taxation on the national energy system.
Attorney General Marshall led the coalition in filing the amicus brief, receiving support from 19 other states, including Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming.
The outcome of this legal dispute holds considerable implications for the division of authority in determining the nation’s energy policies and the balance between state and federal jurisdiction in addressing environmental concerns. As the case progresses, it will undoubtedly shape the future regulatory landscape of energy in the United States.
