In an ironic twist of events, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey struck down a Boston suburb’s attempt to implement a fossil fuel ban last week after her office found that it conflicted with state regulations. The block comes as Healey is trying to advance her own political and regulatory agenda against the fossil fuel industry by superseding federal policy via a lawsuit against ExxonMobil.

Last year, Brookline, Mass. approved a by-law that would prohibit the installation of oil and gas heating systems in new construction beginning in 2021. After reviewing the ban’s legality, however, Healey found that she had no choice but to reject the measure:

“The Attorney General agrees with the policy goals behind the Town’s attempt to reduce the use of fossil fuels within the Town. However, the Legislature (and the courts) have made plain that the Town cannot utilize the method it selected to achieve those goals.”

The attorney general’s office determined that the ban was preempted by statewide building and gas codes, as well as the Department of Public Utilities’ authority to “comprehensively” regulate the sale and distribution of natural gas.

Put simply, Healey blocked the by-law because it undermined state oversight and regulation. If that rationale sounds familiar, it’s because it is – ExxonMobil has long argued that the Massachusetts attorney general’s lawsuit against the company undermines and supplants federal and foreign policy.

In a filing last year, the company argued that Healey “seeks to substitute [her] preferred energy policy for the federal government’s,” because her lawsuit is less about protecting Massachusetts consumers and more so about achieving a policy goal of reducing fossil fuel production and sales:

“Plaintiff’s request that a state court substitute its judgment for the federal government on these issues—and impose significant penalties and injunctive relief based on Plaintiff’s say-so— constitutes a ‘collateral attack on an entire [federal] regulatory scheme . . . premised on the notion that [the scheme] provides inadequate protection.’” (emphasis added)

Healey’s political motivations for attacking energy producers date back to 2016, when she attended the Green 20 press conference alongside Al Gore and then-New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. It was there that she pledged “quick, aggressive action” by her office to “address climate change and to work for a better future” and announced that she was launching an investigation into ExxonMobil, citing a “troubling disconnect between what Exxon knew, what industry folks knew and the company and industry chose to share with investors and the American public.”

More recently, Healey called on the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities last month to investigate the future of the natural gas industry in the state, stating, “In order to combat the climate crisis and meet our clean energy goals, we must transition away from fossil fuels and change the way gas utilities do business in our state.” (emphasis added)

Perhaps the attorney general herself will one day learn the lesson she just taught Brookline – that circumventing the legislative process based on political agenda is not an appropriate avenue to enact regulatory change – and apply it to her own anti-oil and gas efforts.