South Carolina Circuit Court Judge Roger M. Young on Wednesday dismissed the city of Charleston’s lawsuit against 24 oil companies with prejudice.
The city claimed that greenhouse gases accelerated climate change and caused weather-related harm to the city.
Under the lawsuit’s theory, just about anyone could be a plaintiff, the judge wrote.
“Under Plaintiff’s theory, virtually anyone could be a plaintiff – and a defendant – in what would effectively amount to a perpetual series of lawsuits that reset after every storm,” he wrote.
South Carolina Climate Ruling by mcclallen
The city of Charleston will discuss the ruling at the next City Council meeting on August 19, Deja Knight McMillan, the director of communications told Townhall in an email. "At this time, we have no further comment."
Young found that the city had no claim against “Big Oil” under state law.
“The U.S. Constitution makes certain matters the exclusive domain of federal law for good reason,” Young wrote. “If all fifty states, let alone the tens of thousands of political subdivisions therein, were permitted to apply their own laws to such federal issues as interstate and international emissions, the result would be conflicting state standards that would be impossible for energy companies to navigate – what the U.S. Supreme Court called a ‘chaotic confrontation between sovereign states.’”
The judge wrote that many states, counties, and municipalities have sued oil and gas companies over climate change.
"If these lawsuits were successful, municipalities, companies, and individuals across the country could bring suits for injuries after every weather event. The list of potential plaintiffs is unbounded. Moreover, under Plaintiff’s theory, there is no reason to limit the universe of potential defendants to energy companies alone."
The American Petroluem Institute welcomed the dismissal of "meritless claims," Senior Vice President and General Counsel Ryan Meyers told Townhall in an email. "The record of the past two decades demonstrates that the industry has achieved its goal of providing affordable, reliable American energy to U.S. consumers while substantially reducing emissions and our environmental footprint."
He called the lawsuit filed in 2020 "an enormous waste of taxpayer resources."
"This ongoing, coordinated campaign to wage meritless, politicized lawsuits against a foundational American industry and its workers is nothing more than a distraction from important national conversations and an enormous waste of taxpayer resources," Meyers wrote. "Climate policy is for Congress to debate and decide, not a patchwork of courts.” The lawsuit dismissal follows the states of Hawaii and Michigan planning to sue oil companies for damage allegedly caused by climate change.
The DOJ sued Michigan on April 30, 2025 before it could sue the oil companies. Hawaii filed the lawsuit, but Michigan hasn’t. "The DOJ’s baseless lawsuit is a blatant attempt to intimidate my office and deter us from holding Big Oil accountable," Nessel posted on June 23, 2025.
The DOJ’s baseless lawsuit is a blatant attempt to intimidate my office and deter us from holding Big Oil accountable.https://t.co/JVKyR52aDs
— Dana Nessel (@dananessel) June 23, 2025
Fossil fuels, counting petroleum, natural gas, and coal, comprise 84% of total U.S. primary energy production in 2023, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
There are about 250 million registered vehicles that use an internal combustion engine, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.jk