Questions continue to swirl around California’s climate lawsuit, launched by Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta in September. The latest, however, centers around the involvement of Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), a well-known national “Keep It In the Ground” group tied to a variety of anti-energy billionaires whose fingerprints are seemingly all over the case.
New emails obtained by Government Accountability & Oversight suggest that CBD’s potential involvement in the state’s climate lawsuit is interesting given their fraught recent history with the Newsom administration, and suggests that the litigious activist group is carving out a new lane in the national climate litigation campaign.
CBD has filed lawsuits across the country to stop traditional energy production and even renewable energy projects, including suits to block projects in California dating back years. The CBD was a fierce critic of former CA Gov. Jerry Brown, especially over the former California Governor’s refusal to back a statewide fracking ban.
More recently the organization has tangled with Newsom over permitting reform, and just last May sued Newsom regulators over oil and gas permits issued by the state. A press release issued by CBD at the time of their lawsuit excoriated the Newsom administration over the permits, arguing they perpetuated “environmentally racist policies.” Just five months later the CBD struck a far friendlier tone towards Newsom after the state filed its climate lawsuit, praising the Governor and AG Bonta for providing the “climate leadership the world so desperately needs.”
CBD’s apparent shift is all the more noteworthy given the CA DOJ’s resistance to disclosing correspondence involving the group and the state’s landmark climate suit. In response to GAO’s recent open records request, the California DOJ refused to turn over correspondence with CBD email domains exchanged in the months leading up to and after the state’s lawsuit, claiming they are “are exempt from disclosure because they are protected under the work product doctrine.”
The “work product” exemption is curious, as GAO reported, because it is often the posture states and municipalities assume to withhold case preparation correspondence with another well known group, the Center for Climate Integrity. The Rockefeller-funded CCI has a well-established track record providing pre-lawsuit support and media air cover for municipal and state plaintiffs in climate litigation.
The correspondence that was disclosed by the CA DOJ shows that CBD – in collaboration with the Center for Climate Integrity and Corporate Accountability – coordinated with the California Department of Justice ahead of an October 18th briefing on the state’s lawsuit. Despite the fact that the event was branded as a “public briefing,” emails from the California DOJ show the guest list appears to have been limited to a few hand-selected politicians and interest groups.
In December, CBD also hosted a COP28 side event that featured CA AG Rob Bonta speaking about the state’s lawsuit. And while in Dubai, Bonta also appears to have provided a private briefing on the lawsuit to CCI.
Given CBD’s association with activists and donors supporting climate litigation, its potential involvement in the California suit is not entirely surprising.
In its early years, the organization received significant financial backing by controversial Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss, who has also backed entities pushing climate lawsuits. And Kassie Siegel, who leads CBD’s Climate Law Institute, sits on the advisory board for UCLA Law’s Emmett Institute, which has lent out its own students and staff to provide direct support for climate nuisance lawsuits.
CA AG Bonta may have his own political motivations for moving this climate suit forward given his stated interest in running for Governor in 2026. In 2022 Bonta’s AG run was endorsed by the Center Action Fund, the political arm of CBD and billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer. Bonta’s close association with Steyer dating back to Bonta’s days in the CA Assembly creates the appearance the California lawsuit could be a political kickback to a deep-pocketed donor just in time for Bonta’s upcoming gubernatorial run. Bonta also endorsed Steyer’s short-lived presidential campaign in 2020, a decision that angered progressive activists in Bonta’s East Bay legislative district. While Steyer has worked to distance himself from climate lawsuits, it has long been speculated that Steyer backed California municipal climate suits that laid the groundwork for the Bonta’s case.
While Bonta’s political motivations are evident, the local politics of this lawsuit are not nearly as helpful for the CA AG. Whether at COP28 or Climate Week in New York City, both Bonta and Newsom appear keen to confine discussion of this lawsuit to audiences that consist of activist groups like CCI and CBD. Sky-high energy costs remain a top concern for the state’s residents, while state data shows state taxes and regulations add an additional $1.12 to each gallon of gas, and have helped drive up residential electric rates 54 percent since 2018.
BOTTOM LINE: CBD’s apparent involvement in the Golden State’s case adds intrigue, considering multiple California attorneys general – including now-Vice President Kamala Harris – passed on filing the lawsuit for years. While cooperating with groups like CBD may advance the short term political interests of officials like Bonta, California residents already pinched by high energy costs will pay the price for this frivolous suit. That’s exactly why this case deserves greater scrutiny from the press.
