Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana

Chevron v. Plaquemines Parish
Supreme Court of the United States
Full case nameChevron USA Inc, et al. v. Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, et al.
Docket no.24-813
Questions presented
  1. Whether a causal-nexus or contractual-direction test survives the 2011 amendment to the federal-officer removal statute.
  2. Whether a federal contractor can remove to federal court when sued for oil-production activities undertaken to fulfill a federal oil-refinement contract

Chevron v. Plaquemines Parish is a pending United States Supreme Court case regarding which court (state or federal) should hear a case about a federal government contractor.[1][2][3]

Background

See also: Coastal erosion in Louisiana § Oil and gas industry

In April 2025, in one of over 40 related cases,[2][4] a jury in Louisiana state court found Chevron owed $744.6 million for damage to the Louisiana coast.[5][6][7]

The federal courts are generally viewed as friendlier to companies than state courts.[1][2][3]

Supreme Court

In June 2025, the court granted certiorari. Justice Samuel Alito recused from the case.[8][9]

See also

Reference

  1. ^ a b Lubben, Alex (November 20, 2025). "U.S. Supreme Court sets date in Louisiana coastal fight. Billions could be at stake". NOLA.com. The lawsuits were originally filed in state court. Chevron, Exxon and other major oil companies have long argued that they belong in federal court, a jurisdiction that is seen as friendlier to the companies.
  2. ^ a b c Zraick, Karen; VanSickle, Abbie (January 11, 2026). "Supreme Court to Hear Case on Louisiana's Eroding Coast". The New York Times. more than 40 lawsuits filed by Louisiana officials seeking to hold energy companies liable for environmental damage linked to oil and gas production, some of it dating back to World War II. (...) The issue before the justices is whether the cases belong in federal court, which is seen as a friendlier venue for businesses, or before juries and elected judges in state courts. The companies, led by Chevron and Exxon Mobil, contend that they belong in federal court. They have highlighted their argument that oil companies were under federal contracts during the war, playing a key role providing aviation fuel to the United States and its allies.
  3. ^ a b Raymond, Nate (January 12, 2026). "US Supreme Court wrestles with Louisiana communities' lawsuits against oil companies". Reuters. Clement said the lawsuits belong in federal court — a venue generally seen as more favorable to corporate defendants — as they relate to activities undertaken to fulfill U.S. government refinery contracts during World War Two.
  4. ^ Lubben, Alex (April 14, 2025). "Dozens more cases await after verdict holds oil industry responsible for Louisiana coastal damage". NOLA.com. Perhaps more important than the outcome of this case, however, is the fact that it sets a precedent for the 40 other lawsuits that attorney John Carmouche has filed on behalf of coastal parishes, all seeking damages from oil companies to restore areas along Louisiana's eroding coastline.
  5. ^ Lubben, Alex (April 4, 2025). "Jury orders Chevron to pay $745 million for Louisiana coastal damage in landmark trial". NOLA.com.
  6. ^ LaRose, Greg (April 4, 2025). "Louisiana jury rules Chevron must pay $740 million for coastal damages". Louisiana Illuminator.
  7. ^ Brook, Jack (April 4, 2025). "Chevron ordered to pay more than $740 million to restore Louisiana coast in landmark trial". AP News.
  8. ^ Lavelle, Marianne (January 13, 2026). "Alito's Recusal in Oil Case Renews Questions About Justice's Investments". Inside Climate News.
  9. ^ Schonfeld, Zach (January 8, 2026). "Alito recuses himself from oil case ahead of Monday's arguments". thehill.com.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.