U.S.: Supreme Court Declines to Hear Challenge to State Suits Against Oil Firms Related to Climate Change
On March 10, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a Motion for Leave to File a Bill of Complaint brought by 19 Republican-led states, which sought to block five Democrat-led states from pursuing lawsuits against major oil companies.
The state suits, filed by California, Connecticut, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Rhode Island, allege that energy companies have created a public nuisance and violated state laws by misleading the public about the relationship between fossil fuel production and climate change, seeking monetary damages.
The Republican-led states requested that the Supreme Court enjoin the state suits, arguing that the states were exceeding their jurisdictional authority by seeking to regulate global emissions and the national energy system, matters that are outside the reach of any individual state’s regulatory authority.
The Supreme Court’s denial of the motion follows the Court’s recent rejection of energy companies’ efforts to dismiss similar-climate change cases by state and local governments on similar grounds, including rejection of a recent request to review a climate case currently pending in the Hawaii Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over suits between states. While such suits are rare, Justice Clarence Thomas called the court’s general “reluctance” to hear such cases “troubling.”
Link:
Supreme Court Order
U.S.: California Governor Declares State of Emergency, Suspending Key Environmental Regulation
On March 1, 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom issued an order declaring a state of emergency in California “to fast-track critical projects protecting communities from wildfire, ahead of peak fire season” in the aftermath of the Palisades and Eaton fires that occurred earlier this year.
The order suspends the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the California Coastal Act (“CCA”) to expedite the approval timeline for planned fires and speed up the process of clearing trees and vegetation, both of which are part of the state’s strategy to reduce the wildfire risk. Newsom previously suspended the CEQA and CCA in 2019 in a similar bid to expedite wildfire management efforts following the 2018 Camp Fire in Northern California, among the deadliest in the state’s history.
Links:
Press Release
Proclamation of a State of Emergency
Asia: Japan Publishes Final Sustainability Disclosure Standards
On March 5, 2025, the Sustainability Standards Board of Japan (“SSBJ”) published the final versions of its three sustainability disclosure standards (the “SSBJ Standards”). The SSBJ Standards are designed to supplement a reporting company’s annual financial report through disclosure of additional information on the impact of sustainability factors on the company’s financial performance.
The SSBJ Standards are based on the International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) S1 and S2 standards, published by the International Sustainability Standards Board (“ISSB”) in 2023. The SSBJ Standards contain several jurisdiction-specific requirements that companies can choose to apply, as well as certain additional requirements to the ISSB standards. Although the SSBJ Standards are only available in Japanese, the SSBJ has indicated that it will publish additional materials on the differences between these and the ISSB standards soon.
The SSBJ Standards comprise a “universal” disclosure standard, which sets out how the SSBJ Standards should be applied, and two “theme-based” disclosure standards, which cover general sustainability disclosures and climate-related disclosures.
While the exact scope and timing of the SSBJ Standards is still unclear, the SSBJ intends for the Standards to apply to entities listed on the Prime Market of the Tokyo Stock Exchange.
Links:
Press Release
SSBJ Publication: "About SSBJ Standards"
Global: UN Publishes Guiding Principles on Sanctions, Business and Human Rights
On February 25, 2025, the UN Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights announced the publication of the Guiding Principles on Sanctions, Business and Human Rights (the “Guiding Principles”), together with supporting commentary. This resulted from a two-year period of consultation and preparation.
The Guiding Principles establish guidelines and benchmarks for states, international organizations, and businesses to ensure they uphold international human rights standards. Rather than creating new legal norms, the Guiding Principles set out how existing international legal standards should be applied in the context of sanctions.
The Guiding Principles apply to states, the United Nations, and other international intergovernmental organizations and nongovernmental organizations, as well as “all business enterprises and transnational corporations” regardless of scale, economic sector, or jurisdiction. In addition to the general principles, four are aimed specifically at businesses, including principles relating to due diligence, minimization of humanitarian impact in compliance policies, transparency, and a “human rights based approach in business activity.” States are required to ensure, through administrative and judicial measures, that businesses within their jurisdiction or control operating in sanctions contexts do not violate human rights domestically or abroad.
Parties are expected to “use their best endeavors to cooperate in good faith” and are recommended by the Special Rapporteur to consult the Guiding Principles and their commentary closely in carrying out their activities. These activities should aim to mitigate the “serious negative impact of unilateral sanctions” and should not violate internationally recognized human rights nor interfere in the delivery of essential goods.
Links:
Guiding Principles
Commentary
UN Press Release
This publication is for general information purposes only. It is not intended to provide, nor is it to be used as, a substitute for legal advice. In some jurisdictions it may be considered attorney advertising.