In a remarkable turn of events, legal experts have floated a proposal to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for the devastating impacts of climate change.
While the ill effects of extreme temperatures and the casualties as a result of which have been well documented, the proposal is nevertheless bold, suggesting that these companies could face homicide charges.
Growing support for radical action
The proposal, spearheaded by the consumer advocacy non-profit Public Citizen, has been gaining momentum among legal scholars and public officials. “We’ve been really excited to see the curiosity, interest, and support these ideas have garnered from members of the legal community, including from both former and current federal, state and local prosecutors,” Aaron Regunberg, senior policy counsel with Public Citizen’s climate program, told The Guardian.
Notably, Pennsylvania State Representative Christopher Rabb voiced strong support for holding fossil fuel companies accountable. At recent events held at top law schools including Yale, the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard, University of Chicago, and New York University, researchers have been promoting the concept.
The proposal, which will soon be published in the Harvard Law Review, stems from evidence suggesting that the fossil fuel industry deliberately concealed information about the dangers of fossil fuel use from the public. This revelation has led to 40 lawsuits alleging violations of tort, product liability, and consumer protection laws, as well as engaging in racketeering. In addition to civil lawsuits, the researchers argue that fossil fuel companies should face criminal charges.
David Arkush, director of Public Citizen’s climate program and co-author of the proposal, emphasized the importance of criminal law in addressing such conduct. “I think it’s important that some of the most damaging conduct in human history be squarely recognized and pursued as criminal,” he added, speaking to The Guardian.
Drawing on past examples of criminal charges against energy companies, such as the cases of PG&E in 2018 and BP in 2010, Arkush highlights the precedent for holding corporations accountable for environmental disasters.
Challenges and potential impact
Despite growing support for the proposal, significant challenges remain. Cindy Cho, a former Department of Justice prosecutor, acknowledged the complexity of assembling a specialized team capable of handling such prosecutions. Although more convinced by the proposal since reading it, the current professor at Indiana University’s Maurer School of Law emphasized that the case will not be a slam dunk.
“You need people who understand the science on the prosecution team, in addition to people who understand a homicide prosecution, in addition to people who understand big, document-intensive white-collar prosecutions,” she added, speaking at an event at UPenn.
However, Cho conveyed that if successful, criminal litigation could have significant consequences for fossil fuel companies, potentially forcing them to alter their operations.
Proponents of the proposal point to the case of Purdue Pharma, which, in response to federal charges over its role in the opioid crisis, accepted a settlement requiring it to restructure as a public benefit corporation focused on delivering safe drugs and abating addiction. A similar settlement with oil companies could accelerate the transition to clean energy and redress past harms.
